-j-S^S^ 


ii: .;.- '»  "- .' 


*vr^  r* 


MASTER 

NEGATIVE 
NO.  91-80100 


SS«-^.-j--^--.-*-v- 


MICROFILMED  1991 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES/NEW  YORK 


(4 


as  part  of  the 
Foundations  of  Western  Civilization  Preservation  Project" 


Funded  by  the 
NATIONAL  ENDOWMENT  FOR  THE  HUMANITIES 


Reproductions  may  not  be  made  without  permission  from 

Columbia  University  Library 


COPYRIGHT  STATEMENT 

The  copyright  law  of  the  United  States  -  Title  17,  United 
States  Code  -  concerns  the  making  of  photocopies  or  other 
reproductions  of  copyrighted  material... 

Columbia  University  Library  reserves  the  right  to  refuse  to 
accept  a  copy  order  if,  in  its  judgement,  fulfillment  of  the  order 
would  involve  violation  of  the  copyright  law. 


[*r  -  .f.-'L 


•■r-'-  ■•■^:".  >::t! 


AUTHOR: 

KIPK 


WILLI/^ 


^ 


V 


HA'  .ilTON 


^        1 


rL£: 


Dbi\/I 


.-^T! :: 


K  I 


THF  ?-r'v. 


\ 


ST 


\/ 


I 


PLACE: 


f 


I  . 


U/\±  X 


18 


.  J 


^ 


NS 


Master  Negative  # 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 
PRESERVATION  DEPARTMENT 


-  -  3i-3oiQa  _-_  ^  _  _  _ 


BIBLIOGRAPHIC  MICROFORM  TARGET 


Original  Material  as  Filmed  -  Existing  Bibliographic  Record 


r 

L 


t.. 


iric,  William  Hamilton 

Demosthenio  style  in  the  private  orations. 
Thesis  ...  by  William  Hamilton  Kirk  ...   Balti- 
more,  Friedenwald,  1896. 

43  p.    24  cm. 

Thesis    (Ph.^. ),   Johns  Hopkins,  -1895. 


50188 


^j 


A 


•  «   .    -«    ■    .  .ii 


>■»      -Jl^  .  1  t-~.H-  . 


•CM.. 


Restrictions  on  Use: 


TECHNICAL  MICROFORM  DATA 


REDUCTION     RATIO: 


FILM     SIZE:  ^'-.^^ 

IMAGE  PLACEMENT:    lA    ^I^  IB    IIB 

DATE     FILMED: ll___ INITIALS ^zJ^i.-^^ 

HLMEDBY:    RESEARCH  PUBLICATIONS.  INC  WOODBRIDGE.  CT 


// 


r 


^ 


^ 


% 


c 


AMociation  for  Information  and  Image  Management 

1100  Wayne  Avenue.  Suite  1100 
Silver  Spring.  Maryland  20910 

301/587-8202 


Centimeter 

12         3        4 

iiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiilii 


ill 


|ll|l|ll|ll|ll|ll|ll|l 


9      10     n 

iiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiili 


12       13       14       15    mm 


jilmihmlmili^^ 
TTTTTTTT|TTTH 


TTT 


1 


Inches 


.0 


I.I 


1.25 


ti|2,8 

|50      "'" 

2.5 

2.2 

2.0 

1.8 

1.4 

1.6 

MRNUFfiCTURED  TO  qilM  STRNDRRDS 
BY  RPPLIED  IMRGE.  INC. 


JSts-.'-^sy" 


f^^iM 


:,„i.-\«--^ja 


-m^pm^: 


^ 


*;'f^T^ 


l^i 


Li- 


Sri 


ii:  .i 
f 
.1 

'..  1 

■■■  I 


■  I 
t 


.1 

KA 

! 
1 


■;-r        I 


'"*■*:    : 


DEMOSTHENIC  STYLE 


IN   THE 


PRIVATE  ORATIONS 


THESIS 

'  RESKNTED    TO    THE    HOARD    OF    UNIVERSITY    STUDIES 

OF   THK   JOHNS   HOPKIN>    UNIVERSITY    FOR    THE 

DEGREE    (  .•    DOCTOR   O'     P"'T0S0PHY 

BV 

WILLIAM   HAMILrON  KIRK 


\l 


m 


■If  '  vsr 


IS' 


:,1 


BALTlMORi:,  i8gj. 


BALTIMORE 

THE    FRIEDENWALD    COMPANY 

1895 


f 


-•  > .         >■  +■ 


^4 


•   •    •   • 


•  -    • 


•  •     • 

•  ••    •  • 


:^  f  <rO 


•  •  • 


•  •       • 

•  •       • 


« 
•  •  •  ' 


•  •  •      •  " 


•  •  • 


•       •••,••     •, 

••••••     •        • 


•  •  •     •  • 


•      •  •  •     • 


•.  •     •   • 

•  '  •         •  • 

•  ••      • 

«••     ••     •     ••     •• 


DEMOSTHENIC  STYLE 


IN   THE 


XXX  ttj 


KG3 

tit  tit    (fLciit^t 


f  I  % 


G  I  V  EN     BY 


Johns  Hopi^irt5  Uyw 


!  ;. 


14. 


I  '4 


%^ 


h: 


r 
I- 


PRIVATE  ORATIONS 


^2    I  I  I  ^  "^  I  S 


PRESENTED    TO    THE    B(»Aich    OF     UNi\EK-rr>'     -Ti;DiK- 

OF    THE    JOHNS    HOFk!N>    : 'N  ' 'Z  !■  K- T'' V    v->\-:     VHE 

DEGREE    OF    DOCTOR    OF    1  lilLui^ul  ilY 


BY 


\  ^  ■  I! 


lAM   ii.\MfLli,)X   KIRK 


BALTIMORE,  iSgj. 


];  A   I,  T  I   M  ^  .  R  E 
THK    1-  Klh  DKNWAl.I*    !:-MPANY 


% 


•    •    • 


\ 


•  •  • 


Q- 
< 

ci 

rr 


CONTENTS. 

I. — Establishment  of  Tests. 

1.  Denunciation ', 8-9 

2.  Repetition 9-1 1 

3.  Asyndeton 11-12 

4.  Irony 12-14 

5.  Apostrophe 14-15 

6.  Interrogation 15-18 

7.  Rhetorical  Answer 18-19 

8.  Deictic  Expressions   .    < 19-21 

9.  Transitions 21-22 

10.  Prooemia 22-25 

-Comparison  with  Lysias  and  Isaeus. 

1.  Denunciation 26 

2.  Deictic  Expressions 26 

3.  Apostrophe 27 

4.  Interrogation  ;  Rhetorical  Answer 27-28 

5.  Irony 28-30 

6.  Repetition 30-32 

7.  Asyndeton;   Prooemium 32-34 


II.- 


III.- 


•  Examination  of  Suspected  speeches. 
I.  Oration  32 


33 

34 

35 
40 

46 
56 


35-36 
36-38 
38-39 
39-41 
41-42 

42-41 


y 


CTi 


»'*  «•»  ; 


O      J,       ,>       J    >  J       J  * 

as        )    9      *    1  3 


}  ) 


»      >  1   0      3     » 
9   ■> 


•    '     3 


>    >  J 


}     i    ■)        >    }  3 

J     3    ,  >    3     J         i » 


•     >' 


J-» 


J  1   J    J    0    >       0 


•    o    •  • 


DEMOSTHENIC  STYLE  IX    FHE  PR  V ATE 


URA  i  iuI\:D. 


I.— Establishment  of  T'  =ts. 


Of  the  sixty  speeches  which  have  been  h  umu  n  cU  \i  -  m  u  rn 
times  under  the  name  of  Demosthenes,  f  it  \nv  ^  i  i>  ^^o  up 
pleadings  before  a  court;  and  of  these  aga  ii  tut  :v-nine  i.27-50, 
52-56)  are  more  nearly  defined  as  ^oyot  idiwrixot- ,\  urn:  wi  di 
has  no  exact  equivalent  111  English,  and  wh :<  h,  i\(.ii  n  Giet  k^  s 
not  absolute  in  its  definition,  since  Ui.  =^i  -?"'  '^'^  '^'^^.  '^<? 
rpiTjpap/.)  in  all  manuscripts,  and  m  s( mi  1  -1  57  y  ^"pu^  Lufioo- 
Xtdrjv,  xard  Seoxpivov^  xard  Neatpaq),  ;  ;  '  a  11  lii 
Ber.  Ill  49-50).'  This  uncertainty  is  i  lit  -t 
Blass,  in  whose  index  these  four  orations  ai  < 
heading  Privatreden.  :i}\hough  in  ii.^  m  .ak 
440,  476)  he  emph  /ts  the  fact  that  th 
Stxavixu).  drjfxofftot.     Or.  57  he  qualifies  (H 


'Bui 


A  ff 


A'\  (,  d    IHUit'T    1  11' 


.  ^    1  '1. 


!.lI;U.     -^■ 


.Usui' 


t  1    s 
)  J  1 


r 


n  :i 


acter,  though  not  by  strict  construction       j  ivate  s|  tt 


I  i  f 


_  1 


:(i   1 


seems  half  inclined  to  yield  a  like  place  toOi 

the  latter  was  delivered  bef<  ic  iht;  Athenirii,  ScLai'  ,  c^nd  its 
is  the  claim  10  a  public  dist'nrtic  1.  :   tl.e   iormer  is  a<;(^i^ 
anordiiiar;.-  court,  and,  although  c^ni.tH  ;«(i  \\,:h  .i  ]-u\>r.L  mi 
deals  with  matters  of  an  e^:- iu:..r\  ;  .1  :\  ..u- naiui  t  ,   1  n;^^ 
fore   fbuww^d    Blass  in   including   it  ai    .  nu    'he   tdiwnxoi,   ul   !e 
leav'ncc  51  in  the  class  lu  which  it  formal  v  I  t    -->. 

ine  question  how  many  of  these  speeches  n    ^     ^     ^^ 
Demosthenean  has  been  variouslv  an=^wt k  ci    aim     tiia 
morereasonablenes   ^v  Blass  win   :  .cki:    toiirteenonciu 
than  by  the  more  (>    iructive  among  i;a m  i 
speech  against  ::3Lca,.anu:-,  Ur.    :  =^-   n.;-^    ;.t::t.i: 
block    and  Arnold  Schafer's  oujcctiuiib  lu 
him  to  the  beauties  of  its  style ;  but  Plns^:  lia 


;  1 '-  a. ;  ?  ■  :  f   tt 


i  lit 


r  k.  t 


;UfC 


>  Cited  by  the  pages  of  the  first  ediuou. 


t  • 
«  •  • 
•         c 


«   •  •(   t  '  • 


«  • 


•  •    t  •  • 


.•• 


i     « 


1 1 

I  t 


«  t   «     C   I    c      * 


I 
< 
.  c 


tfl       <         l<      (tt 


'reason  for  the  advocacy  of  ApoUodorus  by  Demosthenes,  and 
stylistically  the  speech  refuses  to  be  excluded.  Schafer's  argu- 
ments acrainbt  ihe  ^genuineness  of  the  third  speech  against  Aphobus, 
O-  2..  ii  ive  been  sufficiently,  though  not  exhaustively,  refuted 
by  ill-  a-  n"^  view,  which  was  also  that  of  Westerniann,  that 
this  sp  '  n  >  t:  :  :  -ery  of  a  late  rhetorician,  is  wholly  uuv  i  \>\e. 
as  well  for  ti^  ts  for  any  other  of  the  private  orations.  Il.c 
mos*  I:  ir  ;ri  ;  1  liic  common  to  all,  to  the  obviously  spurious  no 
less  Hi. ill  to  the  admittedly  genuine,  is  their  character  of  reality. 
^^'  'i    ^'^th  cases,  and  enter  into  details,  such  as  no  forger 

would  iir.e  been  at  the  pains  to  handle  or  invent;  the  poorest 
among  them  is  instinct  with  that  breath  of  life  which  literature 
diaw:>  onlv  from  contact  with  fact ;  and  the  purity  of  their  Attic 
diilrrt  o-  -^  fmal  assurance  that  those  which  are  not  by  Demos- 
i:  :u-  liimseif  must  be  attributed  to  contemporaries  of  his  and  to 
the  t  '    •  p  riod  of  Attic  oratory. 

For  distinguishing  the  genuine  from  the  spurious,  or  for  assign- 
ing ceiiaiii  ot  the  laUci  to  a  possible  common  author,  vocabulary 
is  an  aid  to  be  used  with  much  caution.  Two  influences  conspired 
to  keep  the  language  of  these  brief  compositions  as  nearly  as 
might  be  on  a  level  with  the  ordinary  phraseology  of  educated 
Athenians:  first,  their  intensely  practical  spirit  and  purpose;  and 
secondly,  the  fact  that  at  Athens  a  suitor  usually  pleaded  his  own 
case,  and  often  did  so  in  a  speech  prepared  for  his  inexperience 
by  some  trained  and  practised  orator.  Dionysius  of  Halicar- 
nassus  dwells  on  the  art  with  which  Lysias  assumed  the  layman  ; 
the  stronger  genius  of  Demosthenes  showed  an  even  more 
wonderful  pliancy  in  this  respect ;  and  if  inferior  speech-writers' 
were  incapable  of  achieving  a  like  delicate  perfection,  they  were 
certainly  guided  by  the  same  general  conception  of  fitness. 
Individuality  of  expression  must  have  been  further  obscured  by  a 
rhetoric  which  prescribed  stock  arguments  and  reflections  and 
allowed  set  formulas  of  introduction  or  conclusion;  and  when  we 
remember  how  little  remains  out  of  an  immense  mass  of  oratory 

*  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  in  English  the  word  logographer  should  be 
employed,  after  Thuc.  i,  21,  to  denote  writers  of  history.  The  Greek 
?Myoypd(f>og  usually  signifies  one  who  wrote  speeches  for  others  to  deliver  ; 
and  we  need  both  logograph  and  logography  to  express  a  practice  which  is 
never  to  be  left  out  of  sight  in  considering  the  forensic  oratory  of  the 
Athenians,  and  which  had  much  to  do  with  its  unrivalled  excellence. 


i. 


subjected  to  this  rhetoric,  we  may  hesitate  to  find  evidence  for 
individual  authorship  in  the  coincidence  of  phrases  often  essen- 
tially commonplace.  In  his  attempt  to  sh  v  that  iic  iiiaii  wi- 
the author  of  the  speeches  against  M  .  aiiatu:^  !{  ieri:us  and 
Olympiodorus,   as    well    ns    of"  those    m 


iJt'lUi 


<M 


;\l)(;nr)(10rUS 


(excepting  the  first  ai^aaiM  S''aMunii>  ,  !);a^:^  lias  nut  niily  laid 
undue  stress  (III  496,  500-1  ^n  >arh  c.  ^aicickaices,  but  ha>  s.iiiu:- 
times  neglected  to  ob:~ri  v.-  -ha!  .-Apir^.ions  which  lu-  u-ckcms 
distinctive  aic  lu  lc  iuund  ni  conK>  '-..tc-ni:^  h:  nth-r  aiithursiiip. 
T'  IS  the  predicative  use  of  i^  d\^dyxrj<;  an  \)^  i>araliele(i  Ir  in 
Isaeus,  2.  22  and  3.65;  for  thr  rombinaiuai  .,.1  ..ju:  or  .:;'-<- 
•  with  rraraxr^^fjia  compare   I.   n    .i:b    ,v   "■   4^  -'   ^he  same  author 

and  Dem^  29.  15;  n^   ^   '         --7  --^^  b^-  -^   ''''^  *''^^-  "^^^^^'^^^ 

in  the  sense  in  which  bM^^  quotes  :i  lur  ao.   17  and  4-.  4,  nr,  li  he 


>oini 


!o     Kp. 


if! 


-^   1 


iSt' 


M  1 


.!i,t|)?   '. 


\\  t 


insists   on   an   impersonal   n   uici,  \vc 

where,  however,  the  consuucdon  is  wM] 

dative.      That   eVr:   di:  fipaxuq  6  l^yoq  is  a 

from  the  variations  found  in  3.  Jd  ~i    77    ' 

18.  196  and  Lys.  24.  10,  00  -nnXhq  o  Uyuc,  sc.  iffri) 

that  the  critic  attaches  impuiiai.cc  Ij  luj  uaita ana! 

this  trivial  sentence  is  cast.     The  essential  bturt  11 

introductory  sentences  in  43.  31    r     7 

54.   6    lies    in   the    greater    neatne.^^ 

Demosthenean  formulas;  but  all  an 

and  it  cannot  surprise  us  that  at  a  1<  v 

be  less  variety  of  execution.     D.sunct   j 

decrease  in  artistic  power  and  refinement 

authorship  for  which  Blass  argues  '-    r: 
properly  be  maintained  on  the  ground  01 

or  literary  imperfecUons  which  may  bel 
inferior  writers  as  to  one  alone.     Even  in  lar-ci 
parison   the  importance  of  vocabuhu  v  as  an   nui 
chiefly  in  the  tone  and  spirit  which  words  convey 
difference  between  prose   and  poetry   w   n  d   be  in 
mechanical  one,  which,  with  the  Greeks,  it  never  w  .-. 

This  protest  against  an  occasional  over-int  n  u  i  ui  n 
portant  phenomena  does  not  affect  the  sciibc  ui  um  ^  it 
I,  in  common  with  all  students  of  De— thmrs  f^-l  ly 
work  of  Blass.  The  German  critic  ha-  u-\i.urs-  tm  d^ 
path  and  taken  a  broader  sweep  ;  that  it  is  still  possibl 


ant:vr.  not  the 
i  rn » u ;  a  ]  ^  j  a  a  i  11 
;  1:001  parr  also 
It  can  hardh'  be 
^  )rni  Ml  winch 
in.-t\\a-en  the 

,  .    j.    •, ,    *.  '-< .    ,^  ■-<  • 

npactness     n]    the 
tile  same   inraJeh 


I  there  she and 


ni.' 


>    i  1:    :-t  \^  U:    lade    wntd    a 

unl  r\nn;  n  tin;  (a:)nHnuH 

nn  i >ro d;d>i t.' ,  it   lauuiot 

{f-vf  .'  \  I  K-(i  f'vnrc-siuns 

•  ;i   I'  '.   ^      Ol     ''a  )]1'\  - 

X    •■I    '-■y]i'    has 

oint/ru' ;> (* .  t ne 

tha-    nnini    a 


1)1] 


1 1 


n 


;  111 


r  a  a  t 


u ! 


i:    to  i^iean 


w 


.  i  t ; ' )  I  ■  > 


an 


1  <.  I  .■- 


tilt 


8 

he  has   reaped,  I   hope  to  show  in  the  following  pages, 

h        .;-       ;  e  note  of  certain  traits  of  Demosthenic  style 

:  ^       Lirteen  private  speeches  accepted  as  genuine, 

1     tile       iter  a  glance  at  Lysias  and  Isaeus,  proceed  to 

•    iivin  ih    point  of  view  thn?  gained,  some  of  the  doubtful 

An  :    I    shall   begin   by  calling  attention  to  a  class  of 

;     :  i:         •]  intimate  relation  with  the  tone  of  theorator, 

r      nssion  of  which  may  fairly  be  said  to  have  an 


\v  i 


tl  i    I  »  b  ^  i  i 


lI  J  li  V*     (J.  I  i  i  i      i'  I  I  <_  C 


;t. 


Till, 


\\ 


■  1- 


w 


i  >' 


Denuyiciaiion, 

X  niav  be  term!  the  vocabulary  of  denunciation, 
-  u     li,  expressive  of  the  adversary's  baseness  or 

^-'4'^'  •   '•     •     ^^i   -    iie  the  adjectives  avaidr^q  (36.  33,  37.  3.  27, 

54    3S),  h^aiaxuvToq  (27.  18,  29.  53,  55.  28),  ra>^>T,p6q  (45.  80,  54.  24, 
5S.  3o\  ^«^^'^  (30.  4,  45-  4).  «^^^"?  (29.  27,  30.  4,  36.  55,  45.  80), 


u 


>i> ';',-- 


,  :  '^ 


50),   luapoc;  (36.  58,  37.  48),  i3de/Mp6^   (54.  22),   a'^fftoq 
(2<   16),  dxa^^apznq  (37.  48),  <T;^£r/i«<r  (29.  19,  30.  46)  ;  the  adverbs 

dvaidwc,  (27.   16.  24.  62),  aifrypd>^  (27.  57.  62,  29.  49),  di^ixioc;  (57.  5), 

7TXso>£XTixw^  1.5;.  0    i  the  substantives  dvaideta  (27.  22.  24.  31.  34, 
2Q    I,  31.  6,  36.  61,  37.  45,  45.  44.  71.  73,  54.  37,  55.  8,  57.  64), 

a.a:axo.7ia  (27.  38.  64,  38.  5),  ro^^r^fna  (27.  26,  36.  56,  45.  2,  54.  37), 
aitrxpoxipdeia  (27.  38.  46.  29.  4,  45.  2),  -w.oupyia  (29.  51,  30.  24), 
liiapia  (29.  4),  xaxoupyia  (45.  39).  To  these  may  be  added  the 
verbs  <xv^r^;^{^vr£?v  (29.  57,  45.  44)  and  r.aM^pyCv^  (29.  5).  I  omit 
as  ''>fipis  and  daikyzLa^  which  are  specifically  applicable 
:  violence,  and  cite  only  those  passages  in  which  the 
1  1)  tt  appears  as  a  clear  and  frank  expression  of  the 
V-    :  (  iitiments  concerning  his  adversary. 

:  II  of  this  list  reveals  two  facts  worthy  of  note:  the 
^  r.  39  (the  first  against  Boeotus)  and  41  (r/^c  Ir.uuoiav') 
t:nm  it;  the  second,  that  the  proportion  of  denuncia- 
ssions  is  larger  in  the  speeches  delivered  by  Demos- 
M  If  than  in  those  composed  at  a  later  period  for  clients. 
r atoiLs  -7-31,  contain  thirty-one  such  words  against 
I  :tv  III  lu  be  found  in  seven  other  speeches;  and  fifteen  occur 
in  Ui ,  27  ^xard  'A(p6,3ou  a'),  ten  in  Or.  29,  while  Or.  45,  longer  than 
^--''■'  '  these  and  extraordinarily  bitter  in  tone,  has  not  more 
man  ven.  it  would  seem  that  in  his  youth  Demosthenes  gave 
i   r     r  rein  to  the  passion  which  seeks  issue  in  vigorous  and  down- 


A 


are 

tor 

tilt 


f-'X 


III' 


f 


right  abuse,  while  later  he  learned  to  clothe  the  same  sentimein  i 
a  more  refined  and  subtle  expression.     The  triumph  (>'  ta  s  it  nj  e 


'.  'eoti- 


\\ 


:U' 


re,  waliiiiil 

Ti'^OTZoua    (:■!    lilt-  :x|)(a-a;h  ; 
n   !.iw.  wa-lu  s   t(  ^  aroiist' 


a  cuiir-aU' 
'1    scrapu 


alt: 


,ria  iriiinij 


A', 


1 ; .  t 


'  :- .   \\ 


lA' 


aiie  abr 


ment  is  seen  in  the  first  "r«"ech  aca* 
the  employment  of  any  i;  aah  w    :  :, 
scorn  and  rebuke.     The  cause  lies  in 
M    naia         uhosecase  has  no  supp 
in  the  jiidL;e5  a  ^eiise  of  what  ib  Liai   a 
he    poses    throughout   a^    a    nersi  11 
displays  an  ostentatious  considta    ta. 
of  a  brother  wiaHi   he  despises  ai 
u;a  satisfying  his  legal  claims.     Kra  i  ha 
A-  Or.  41,  we  liia)   trace  ihcie  the  iijlinen 
A  respectable  citizen  of  mature  years  1  a- 
with  Spudias,  the  husband  of  h"-  w'^es  sister;  hi 
as  a     tigious  individual  (§2  T.ok/.dxtq — eu^KT/ii^oc.  t:24     ' 
Tar),  and    h  a -^  not  hesitate  to  speak  his  in  lai  .h  <  iit 
pursued  hy  li  a,  ^;;J9-30  ^^d  rahra  x.  r.  f.);   but  a>  ua  Tr- 
quarrel  between  them,  and  obviously  no  deb, re  1  r^ 
envenom  this  and  destroy  all  harmony  hi  tlie  f^mi  1\ 
able  man  refrains,  in  rather  a  dignified  way,  irom  using  la  i.-hi 
unpleasant  epithets. 

Repetition. 

Rhetorical  figures  belong  to  the  common  st 
some  of  them  at  least  possess,  or  are  capablt 


>  aiu:  ie«..-aae^ 
hhe  adnattia- 
a  \k  -w  i)ia-;~aiit(,  t.i 
bciiae  s.haia/iil. 
|)ri  spertv 
a  r  i ;  >  S '  a  H 1  a .  s 

liu-  C(air>e 
i"^  ia.>  t.''  hri* 

aa^   I^art    !^> 
a?"  r<,'Si/eot- 


of  oral.  I)  ;     \i\ 
receivine.  siutli 


*  By  this  term  I  wish  to  denote  the  expression  \\\  the  a?  rer's  stvlt  .* 
the  speaker's  personality;  it  applies  only  to  those  speeches  wtiLis  \\eiL 
written  for  others  to  deliver,  and  has  nothing  to  do  with  characterizations 
of  a  third  person  {j(^apaKTripLa^6q).  Thus  in  the  speech  tui  Fhormio  (36)  the 
Tjdonoua  lies  only  in  the  complete  self-suppression  of  the  advocate  ;  in 
such  speeches  as  those  against  Pantaenetus  and  Conon  the  mental  lir.ca 
ments  of  the  speaker  are  in  a  measure  revealed  to  us.  Of  course,  this 
reflection  of  character  in  style  is  an  artistic,  not  an  absolutely  truthful,  one. 
For  this  somewhat  arbitrary  use  of  an  elusive  and  ill-defired  wor'^  I  find 
support  in  Nicolaus  Sophistes,  Progymn.  in  Spengel  KheL  ill  469; 
ij-doTToda  koTi  ^oyog  dp/i6^uv  Tolg  vnoKeifiivoig^  Tjdoq  rj  nddoq  tficpalvuv  rj  koX  ovvafi- 
(pdrepa  •  dpfid^uv  fiev  roig  vnoKEifiEvoi^,  kneid^  del  aroxdCEC^ai  Koi  tov  Myovroq  Koi 
irpo^  bv  Tiiyet  •  ^i^of  rff  Kat  Trd^og  fj  Koi  avvafKpdrepov,  eneidrj  f)  nphq  rd  aa^dXov  Tiq 
aTto^XiTZEL  fj  irpb^  to  ek  TTEptaTdaECjg  yLvdfiEvov.  The  idea  here  conveyed  is  not 
always  easy  to  distinguish  from  that  implied  in  tie  term  to  Trpinov  ;  but 
the  definition  is  more  consistent  and  satisfactory  tnan  thos-  which  con- 
found r]-&onoua  on  the  one  hand  with  TrpoouTronoua,  on  the  otner  wit))  the 
purely  moral  ^vJof. 


lO 


distinctive  tone  and  character  as  to  cast  light  on  the  mental  quali- 
ties of  the  writer  who  uses  them.  Among  the  figures  of  speech 
(ay^r^iiara  Xi^awq)  employed  by  Demosthenes,  Blass  notices  repeti- 
tion in  its  various  forms.  Of  these,  epanadiplosis^  is  not  very 
common  in  the  private  speeches ;  I  have  observed  only  seven 
examples :  oux  eort  rahr'  oux  effzt^  27.  57,  29.  49  ;  /^or^STJffar'  ouv  ijfi'iv 
^or)f^rj(TaTS,  28.  20  ;  '>t>  tid  JC  <>o-^,  29.  59;  Touro  dij  tout\  41.  22; 
dXX'  ooy  ourom  1\  oux  wxvrjtTz,  45,  56  ;  Tzo'^r^po^  U)  a.  'J.  7:()>7)pd^  ubro^ 
45.  80.  An  tpiiuia  is  much  more  frequent,  either  in  asyndeton — 
which  is  decidedly  the  strongest  form— or  with  connectives, 
usually  /!£> — Si.  Of  the  asyndetic  arrangement  we  find  examples, 
with  iteration  of  one  word,  in  36.  38  (oV  hei/iaro^  o<t'  eiffe-rpd^aro, 
oV  cr'Ar/(r£),  ib.  53  (the  negative  particle  five  times  repeated),  37. 
36.  37,  o^  ->.  o4-  28;  of  two  words  27.  38  (raDr'  00  iieydXri  xai 
■Kzptipa^^ij^  dvattryuvrta  ;  raur^  ouy  UTzep^oXrj  Setvi'^c;  aiff^poxepdetaq  ;),  30. 
30,  3".  ! !  Examples  with  Aiev — Si  are  more  in  number:  27.  30 
(xczrry/jt'x/v  fjLi> — xexTT^iiivuv  di),  28.  1 8,  37.  44,  38.  1 6  (where  the  shift 
of  tense  shows  that  the  speaker  might  have  said  rore  fikv — vov  di^ 
and  that  rori  is  used  for  the  sake  of  the  emphasis  which  lies  in 
repetition),  39.  34.  41  ?2,  45.  21.  42,  55.  20.  35  ;  and  with  change 
of  inflection  in  36.  23  y^^f'e^rjfii'^ou  /li'y — yeye^rjtxivrjq  di)  and  45.  86  (a 
double  instance  :  douXoi  fih  txs'tuot,  dooXo(;  d\ti}Tvq  tjv^  dtffr.orat  S^u/ie'tq, 
dsffTTOTTji;  o'tjv  iyw).  Formally,  of  course,  anaphora  may  be  said  to 
occur  with  the  repetition  of  any  word,  however  unimportant  or 
inevitable;  but  the  repetitive  effect,  which  comes  sharply  and 
vigorously  in  the  reiteration  of  the  monosyllabic  demonstrative, 
29.  45  (compare  also  rj' <5e,  39.  15),  is  hardly  to  be  felt  with  less 

'  In  the  terminology  I  have  here  followed  Blass,  III  144-7  \  c£.  also  Reh- 
dantz,  A'eun  Philtpp.  Red.  hid.  pp.  5-6,  12,  22,  Ernesti,  Ltx.  Techn.  Khet. 
Thus(iT)ai'aJi;rAwCT<c  is  the — asyndetic — repetition  of  a  word  within  the  same 
clause,  or  (Dem.  28.  20)  of  a  word  which  itself  constitutes  a  clause;  in 
(c7r)am^opd  two  or  more  clauses  begin,  in  avriarpoc^r}  end,  with  the  same  word 
or  words  ;  ovanTioKri  is  the  combination  of  these  two  figures,  or,  in  substance, 
the  repetition  of  a  clause  of  several  words.  In  KVKAoq  the  second  clause 
ends  with  the  initial  word  of  the  first,  in  ai>aaTpo<pTf  it  begins  with  the  last 
word  of  the  preceding  clause.  The  various  relations  might  be  symbolized 
as  follows  : 


epanad. 

a  a 

anaph. 

a—,  a— 

antistr. 

— b,  — b 

(tv/zttA. 

a — b,  a — b 

KVK. 

a—, —a 

anastr. 

b,  b 

II 


it    i  .1 1 


accumulation,  such  as  we  see  in  29.  7  or  41.  11.  Anapho;^  with 
three  words  connected  by  ij  appears  in  31.  13  (^rtdx;  i<TTt  dixauv^ — 
^  ::.  L  ^.) ;  ^nd  the  same  passage  shows  a  somewhat  irrc^iiar 
form  with  change  of  inflection  (idv  iikv  dydor^xovra  fiuw/  tS^^c  opooq, 
oySorjx^tvra  jxvdq  &}vat  rijv  izpolxa)^  as  well  as  tWO  clear-C  it  ?  xai;  :  ](  S 
of  anastrophe  (^av  de  nXetovix;  ttAcIov,  ^dv  8^  kkaTzovoq  e/arrov),  tO 
which  figure  there  is  a;,  aiyproach  in  31.  ^5  ul  dixaiwc — d'.Y.aio)':'), 

and  30.  24  (wq  dizXiu  nveq — dr/a><j  ot>5'  av  jicxpirA.  liKit  s  n 
imperfect  xuxXoq  in  57.  54  (^^yov — ^^«v),  ant'^tr;  ;  in  ii  .15.  ;8 
{^imrpoTzeuffat  fikv  xaxd  diai^rjXTjV — vod^  iizirpor.cui'hi^at  xara  oiayH^xr^v)^ 
ib.  82  (£1  /i7)d£vd(;  rwv  aXXwv  eXarrov,  ifiou  y^  eXaTTov^,  aiul  ii  45 
fine  examples  noted  by  Blass,  111  147,  of  (TufiTzXoxTj ;  a  ih 
perfect,  occurs  in  29.  14  (w^  r.ep\  /liv  nviOi^  (Ta<p7jq  ij  Sana 
d\ii)  TLviov  no  (Ta(prj<;^.  in  37.  3  {dtxajy — dtxrjv')  thrre  is 
application  of  the  principle  of  repetition. 

This  figure,  which  convex  -  ui  (  ttect  of  i :s>!ei 
energy,  is  suffic:- ;::!}■  \w;;  •  rpu -t  n^  o  :ji  th^-  pr:\. 
Demosthenes  to  be  citea  ab  ciiai a  i  !  >•  iinji'i^h 
on  the  whole,  sparing.  It  appea-^  \  tii  na  -t  tiai 
greatest  mass  in  Or.  45,  but  ^  reiativeiy  it  -- 
speeches  written  forclien^  :;  n  in  tlii  tw  it 
himself,  and  is  very  w^  ak  a.  two  of  -a.-  ara  -i  ora'a.a-,  :s.)  ai  d  54 
(xard  K6./w>oq)^  and  in  one  ot  t  u  longest,  S7  ('^poq  Eb^ouXidriv).  In 
these,  however,  we  find,  Wiiii  uiiitr  maiKb  ui  the  oreat  oraioi  :3 
hand,  numerous  examples  of  a  still  more  import  at  -  ra  ariral 
figure,  which  has  also  a  syntactical  value,  asv     ieton. 

Asyndeto7t. 

This  is  employed  by  Demostheaa- wan  iaj  1    la 
It  is  least  effective  when  merely  explanatory,  as  m  -7 
payttq  r.hriq  ^v)  ;  and  the  weakest  use  of  this  explua 


hicai 


;"  ■  \\a) 

\.    a  SS 
-^.p\ 

aji  }se 

\-  and 

;.  f;Cla  S   ol 

a  <  >  i    a   ;  > , 
\'     .int!     al 

'aer 


,  ("  1 


\- 


!  ;a- 


\   ■--    a  uaa 

,  u    iii>iL,ZO- 

nde- 


!  Ih 


ton  is  found  in  the  resumption  (fa    sja  *    h 
of  documents  or  testimony.    To  tlit  i  xjat  r~-  . 
struction  lend-  ^ita*  force;  compare,  l*  i    ad 
-  1    3^>  36.  50,  37.  40,  45.  80  (two  fine  exan  p 
55.  25.  31,  57.  60.     There  is  scorn  'n  -n.  14  a 
12,  36.  52,  39.  34.  36,  57.  61  ;  pathob    a  a  ; 
of  the  asyndeton  to  express  haste  and     a   < 
introduction  of  testimony  ;  the  command  t 
prefaced  by  zat',  uvv^  (tu  di,  but  often  DemosiiiLiitas 
Xa^i,  or  Xiye. 


'at  aai; 


.;  >. ,- . 


a    f 


laaaaii 
;>  i  t  "'Vi  - 


Uia 


.laa 


V    11  Ii  J  \' 

J 


12 


This  figure  acquires  greater  weight  when  it  is  made  cumulative 
by  the  asyndetic  sequence  of  several  clauses  or  words.  It  may 
then  convey  an  effect  of  rapidity  and  may  be  strengthened  by 
ii:  i{)hora;  cf  ;;  36  (^av  '''^<p7j  t^C,  o^'-'  otzX'  i-Kicpiprj^  av  iTZixararifi\^rj)^ 
39-  33  37  -  ^"^  especially  the  very  elaborate  example  in  28.  20, 
which,  in  lii-  words  h^zsidoj  dvn^oXw^  shows  a  heightening  of  the 
force  by  an  accumulation  of  words  cognate  in  meaning,  a  figure 
which  is  also  described  as  a  form  of  epanadiplosis  (Blass,  III 
147);  cf.  36.  52  (tXauvsi^  diUixetq  (Tuxoipavr^lq)^  ib.  47,  39.  ;i  In 
,"    :  t  vividness  is  thus  given  to  the  action  of  a  third  person. 

iaiticipial  clauses  are  also  found  in  asyndetic  sequence;  cf.  27.48 
(rijv  dta^^riXTjv  7J<pa>tx6ra,  rd  w^dpaTtoSa  Tzenpaxdra^  raXX*  outcd  rcdvra  dioj- 
xTjxora),  whrre  this  construction,  occurring  at  the  end  of  a  long 
polysyndeton,  gives  a  strong  effect  of  increasing  warmth  and 
vehemence,  which  is  heightened  by  the  hammering  beat  of  the 
homioteleuton.  In  29.  55-7  there  is  a  succession  of  nine  participial 
clauses  without  connectives ;  shorter  complexes  of  like  character 
ip'u-^ir  in  4T.  16  and  57.  56.  In  41.  14  two  participles  are  com- 
bined \  3  ,!i  idjective,  in  54.  27  with  a  substantival  expression 
of  time  ;  in  54.  30  a  relative  clause  stands  between  two  substan- 
tives, and  in  45.  36  the  two  participles  have  substantival  force. 
Often  the  whole  series  consists  of  substantives,  to  the  utterance 
of  which  this  figure  may  lend  an  air  of  haste,  as  in  30.  17,  39.  9, 
or  of  serious  emphasis  and  stress,  as  in  57.  24.  55,  while  emphasis 
is  colored  with  indignation  in  36.  53  and  45.  39. 

Among  figures  of  thought  ((T'^rjfxara  diw^oiac;')  three  stand  out 

prominently  in  the  style  of  Demosthenes  :  irony,  apostrophe,  and 

interrogation. 

Iro7iy. 

The  quality  of  his  irony  is  vivid  and  cutting;  cf.  28.  6,  31.  12 
(j^b  Tzpozepov  Y^  71  Tzapd  ffoi^  vuv  el  dXrji^r^  Xi-jr£i<;\  36.  44  ('Te  ydp  av 
TtpoTtpo'^  ypTjffrov  irzoirj^e'^  £r  ^v  in*  ixeivip^  ;  see  also  30.  20,  36.  54, 
37-  38,  where  in  the  sarcastic  emphasis  given  to  the  opponent's 
name  there  is  a  concentration  of  the  irony  which  suffuses  the 
whole  context  of  these  passages.  This  suffusion  with  ironical 
coloring  is  very  noticeable  in  Or.  39 ;  it  appears  also  in  Or.  37 
and  in  long  episodes  of  Or.  36.  43-7  and  49-54.  Especially  to 
be  remarked  is  the  accumulation  of  sneering  phrases  in  36.  52, 
37.36.  ^  netimes  again  the  utterance  is  very  brief,  as  in  the 
scornful  axx  00  drjTzou  w  -,,  41.  i6,  and  the  sharp  side-cut  in  38.  20 


13 


The  temper  which  reveals  itself  in  ironical  ui 
also  in  other  ways  in  Demosthenes ;  as  in  th 


lie  >  corn  I 


(^{ 


{ i> 


X  Me 

LihlitSh 


of  36.  44  (:rdv  uv  dyvorjffeiac,)^  ;;.  31  'xairoL  riq  dv  aoi  bpay  'i  ^  3(.i/- 
pLtav),  45.  66  {dlV  ir^  T<f  xepoaiveiv  r.dv  dv  ouroq  TtocTJffete'/) ,  nud  .n 
the  paradoxical  turn  of  29.  13  (fro<pifTrrj(;  xai  awobp*  kxw.  r/  -.xar' 
dpoerv  rpoffTzoiou/ievoq :  repeated  ai  a  -i.ghuy  ditieient  luini, 
30.  36),  and  of  45.  19  (ooroi  dk  ipwpaf^tUv), 

The  same  sense  of  -uiu'i-3>ritv.  tlie  s^ne  air  of  t.,wer;n-  abiwe 
ih-  aJ;  ^'1 -ary,  is  man:h-tt/3  -n  th*-  » fluiKes  whu.ii  Dcniohthent's 
sometimes  administers.      ('"ii:!^:M,    tin^  maw  cn   2^ 


,'//  / 


..nyyr 


J      ■". 


Iieydk-^  X,  T.  i.),  ai.d  of  3:.  -J  i^i?:'  ^x£fvo;<r  tx/aer'  dv  .  :c  i-ocslre 
dixaiioc;);    compare  Or.    -^(^  passim,   an  1    <-^pr  idUy    the   m  iii^h  d 

irony  and  rebuke  -!'  'he  !>n^^n"''  i  t-iennii^i:  nlV  w  -^^^  ^-^'-'j-- 
Ihnwri,  34;  finally  much  ol  tlu-  1  )..->;(  .iicae.'  arra-nnient  ni  Orr.  36 
and  45.  A  similar  feel  ae  liiaa-  -  >;)i>-saai  :a  lilting  the  yc^uih  oi 
the  spe.^iv  J  in  54.  -3.  ^4.  4^.  .^iw.  .u  :i.t  nana:  iiuii}-  ol  55.  i -^ 
(ot>  ydp  ixnteJv  ^e  dyJTZou  x.  r.  A,). 

It  is  to  be  remarked  that  in  i  )rn,o-iha.aa'S  aia-tiopiie   ;-•  niun 


\"    \\ 


inan\'    el    tne    pa^^a^t^ 


i'uaa  waas! 


nnpO!  ta!;l 


tinged  more  or  le^^     a^ 

cited  above  a-     apostrophic  ii    am  , 

to  recall,  this  (Tyrj/m  of  ;  a  rhetoricians  a  11  tnah  a  .  r,  a  na  i  tal 
habit,  and,  like  all  inmiic  lcilueiica_^.  ^^^^..'/.d  3a^  anaa-  u*  eraeia^ 
whenever  occasion  permitted,  while  t  la  laa  it  :i:ii-  t  rah  wee 
by  nature  it  would  be  less  aieunabie  ihaii  \ih-  ni^a^'  laarjutnua^i 
among  tin  a;.aires  of  thought.  Aaa  ;,:^.  i 'ana -^' ataa-  waaacn 
'where  he  could,  ^a.f  ne-^  p3t\-  !>>  tana  (iun.:i\  ta  ni^  laaAn  ^-o, 
where  he  ua:3  obliged  to  hold  it  in  cla 
see  it  revealed  by  brief  flashes,  ]itt]i  in  i 
This  is  what  happens  in  Ur.  57.  tint  i  j 
most  satisfactory  guarantees  lor  the  autla  i 
A.  Schafer's  doubts  concerning  it  ari^'  n 
boldness  with  which  Euxitheus,  a  n  an  ' 
fronts  his  powerful  enemy,  Luuundeb  i  n: 
themselves  on  their  Tzappr^tTia,  and  -t  was  es-eat 


,  w  a  nau  \a.a  t-xpt  ct  la 
aLi  n  ■ni;  nt-^-  •  ■'.  :i'i  aai  ti:  e. 
'■laa :-    t  ■  i    na,.*   <  a'a 

;  *  V    ,  ^'     •  a  ',  t 


r 


.1  tne 
a  ai  h. 
.a  lia.'  neeana];  anci 
a,  :  a  a'  pissUa  an  cea]- 
aa  Atheiaai:<  laaeeci 


n,  a  a  i.  ^  <  inv  • :  ^ 
1  a- 


ninja-te- 


k'  r  r-ai.aad  eaiM)M'   the   aia-irac'er 
U'va.);  (3ai' n-  h(-  .:-  !)(-(!  ant;  da-win 


ness  of  his  deh  a      nan  the  si 
and  motives  of  his  accusers, 
right  in  a- n  a -.    la   i:.  which 

as  in  stating  the  p.uui:.  ul   h::5  uwr.  en. .a  laAnp  :    nai  tha  eonseaai^- 
ness  of  his  weakness  in  the  face    f  uas     -•  in;  '  ("^  rivr<-,  ;  ,  a-r,- 


aa  i\ «.:  n  >  !  nen'  n  i^-iaa^e 


Tec,  §13,  cf.  §10  and   §16),   aaa 


uie 


rnn.mae!-  ce    unr  tnne. 


H 


inspire  a  nervous  anxiety,  which  is  easily  felt  in  the  lengthy  and 
generalizing  prooemium,  in  the  eager  pathos  of  the  conclusion,  in 
the  appealing  humility  of  §36  (/irjda/xwq  w  a.  S.  x.  r,  i.)  and  §45 
(xac  yap  el  ra7:eivdv  x.  r.  yi.),  in  the  resigned  tone  of  §33  (^dXXd  yap 
X.  r.  X.)  and  of  §66  mt'L  This  nervousness  tempers  the  boldness 
and  causes  a  certain  indirectness  of  speech  in  attack;  cf.  §7  (tk; 
— xaraffrafTtatTf^st^),  and  the  vague  form  given  to  the  accusation  of 
svcnphnncy  in  §§32,  34,  49.  It  is  true  that  the  first  of  these  slurs 
:^  •  1  A  :  by  a  more  direct  denunciation  (^ttcj — dLafidiXef:^  ;  but 
tit  v:  c  K  r  at  once  checks  himself  and  falls  back  on  insinuation 
(a  yap  u/ieU  Iffze  x.  r.  X.).  The  same  fear  of  venturing  too  far 
appears  in  the  fieeting  shade  of  irony  conveyed  by  the  repetition 
of  the  proper  name,  §15-16;  and  the  more  vigorous  sneer  in  §5 
(xa\  fid?dov  7j  7:pof77;x£>)  is  yet  very  brief.  A  comparison  of  this 
-p  t'ch  with  the  first  against  Stephanus  or  with  the  defense  of 
i  ii  )rmio  shows  the  full  extent  of  the  reserve  which  has,  however, 
not  prevented  the  orator  from  bringing  out  clearly  much  that  is 
damaging  to  the  accuser.  It  is  the  ironic  tendency  controlled  by 
m  admirable  art  which  produces  this  subtle  blending  of  frank 
vigor  with  tremulous  slyness  ;  and  here,  as  elsewhere,  we  feel  the 
y^^oTzotia  which,  with  Demosthenes,  consists  not  in  descending  to 
his  client's  level,  but  in  raising  the  latter  to  his  own  height ;  he 
dignifies  the  lowly  Euxitheus,  as  he  lends  grace  to  the  rusticity  ol 
the  opponent  of  Callicles  and  loftiness  to  the  rage  of  ApoUodorus.* 
Apostrophe  and  interrogation  are  figures  at  any  orator's  com- 
mand; and  while  their  absence  from  a  speech  has  a  certain  signifi- 
cance, the  effect  of  their  presence  depends  on  the  tone  imparted 
to  them  by  their  position  and  by  the  feeling  which  they  convey. 

Apostrophe, 

[::  the  use  of  apostrophe — a  term  meant  here  to  include  only 
the  act  of  turning  from  the  judges  to  address  the  adversary — 
the  fourteen  speeches  exhibit  great  variety.  There  is  no  example 
of  this  figure  in  Orr.  27  and  30;  onlv  one,  and  that  very  brief 
in  T);  ^,  a;  'e  it  abounds  in  Orr.  36,  37,  39  and  45,  and  is 
not  infrequent  in  the  remaining  speeches.  Sometimes  it  occu- 
pies passages  of  considerable  length,  as  in   28.  7-10,  36.  43-54, 

*  Other  examples  of  irony  or  superiority  of  tone  in  27.  22,  28.7,  29.  14, 
31.  10.  \2fin.,  36.  21.  34,  37.  34.  54,  39.  13,  38.  16.  26,  41.  20.  24,  45.  26.  30.  50, 
54.41/f//. 


15 


['■    Dt- 


^US- 


X\ 


45.  78-80;  sometimes  is  confined  to  a  brief  phrase  or  two,  as  in 
31.  12,  41.  26,  45.  84,  57.  31.  The  apostrophe  is  essentially  pas- 
sionate in  tone,  and  is  therefore  in  general  not  used  by  P  n  )S- 
thenes  as  a  mere  vehicle  of  argument;  the  ex  t 
ceptible  of  explanation  on  artistic  grounds.  So  m 
and  brief  passages  (36.  10.  19.  22,  39.  24  41.  2^  tli 
gives  a  sharper  point  to  the  argument,  an  ^  tn  t ;  \.  ii  h  u  pt  n  •  n 
the  very  brevity  ;  the  incontrovertible  sta^  *  :  t  -  i  sa  a  ('tn  iia  r 
flung  at  the  adversary.'  In  39.  28  we  have  a  pas  i^  vi:  h  1  ;i\ 
he  explained  by  the  influence  of  the  dramatization  in  ri — ovojia', 
having  fallen  thus  into  direct  address,  the  niti  :  1  1  luc- .1  lu 
the  end  of  the  short  argument.  Or.  31  ^u\ki  hccuijd  asrninst 
Onetor),  a  very  short  and  very  passionate  speech,  r'  *  -  n 
mingled  apostrophe  and  interrogation;  it  woulf'  -m  as  if  the 
reduction  of  these  emotional  figures  to  an  argumentative  and 
expostulatory  tone  were  the  only  way  in  which  the  orator.  v%  ih 
little  space  at  his  command,  could  pass  from  the  vciicriKiii  nerce- 
ness  of  eTTtfra  to  deivorarov  and  the  sharp  questions  fbllrwinp  it 
into  the  quieter  and  more  dignified  manner  better  suited  lor  ih- 
delivery  of  the  final  words.  In  Or.  55  (r^po^  KaXXtxXia)  also  the 
apostrophe,  in  §5-7  and  §29,  is  infused  with  expostulatioi  ;  mat 
is  a  part  of  the  iji^oizoita  of  the  speech,  and  conti.butc^  tu  the 
impression  of  youthful  candor  and  honest  simplicity  which  the 
speaker  makes  upon  us.  But  a  dominance  of  the  argumentative 
quality  is,  on  the  whole,  unusual  with  Demosthenes;  more  char- 
acteristic are  the  sudden  and  brief  turns  on  the  adversary  of 
which,  among  the  speeches  exhibiting  this  figure,  Or.  28  alone 
furnishes  no  example." 

Interrogation. 

The  question  also  must  be  considered  v.  1  rt  U  rence  t  tl  e 
varying  degrees  offeree  involved  in  it;  its  pr.in  ir\  »  ii  ^  1  ty  e 
is  to  express  the  irruption  of  feeling,  and  in  judging      p  rt  cular 

>  There  is  a  very  beautiful  instance  of  this  in  36.  2  ~;  tlie  argument  is 
first  hurled  at  ApoUodorus  in  the  form  of  a  challenge  {ik  noiuv — e/dyxaveg  ;)t 
and  is  afterwards  repeated  in  a  form  which,  though  still  aggre^-\c.  is 
brought  nearer  to  the  argumentative  tone  by  the  use  of  iht-  third  person 
and  by  the  preceding  conditional  clause. 

•Other  examples  of  apostrophe  occur  in  29.  36-7.  41.  42,  31.  6-S  4, 

36.  20.  30-32.  39,  37.  26.  29.  30-31.  36.  49-50-  54-  55-  57.  38-  16.  18.  23.  2 J  ::, 
39.  8.  9.  10.  21.  24.  26.  28.  30-32.  33-36,  41.  16.  17.  18,  45.  38.  69-70.  81.  82.  84, 
54-40.  57  31.32- 


uiiiitting  .- 


questions,  1  ni  d  * 

i[)i>t^ai ;  3)  a-     riion 
Oi  these  ^j^k:-:-.  i  ■ 


16 


Style  we  have  to  ask  what  is  the  range  of  the  feeling  so  expressed. 
For  this  purpose  some  sort  of  classification  seems  necessary,  not 
like  that  quoted  from  Tiberius  by  Rehdantz,  Index,  s.  v,  Frage, 
which  looks  onlv  at  the  speaker's  object  in  employing  the  form  of 
interrogation  1  iii  one  which  shall  regard  the  content  of  each  ques- 
tion i;  1'  ;:om  its  rhetorical  form.  Arranging  on  this  principle 
till       t  : :    .    :  ^       ;  la  es  in  the  genuine    private     m    ches  and 

enomena  as  the  imperative  and  dubitative 
in  each  instance  one  or  the  other  of  the  fol- 
niarkedly  predominates  :  i)  argument;  2) 
4)  challenge  ;  5)  suggestion, 
the  first,  which  is  unemotional,  is  hardest 
to  discover  in  1 )  nosthenes  ;  most  of  the  examples  which  one 
attempts  to  get  for  it  melt  away  and  dissolve  themselves  into 
iv^rr- on,  appeal,  or  challenge.  That  is  to  say,  even  when  the 
questic:  >  :  itended  as  an  argument,  the  liveliness  of  tone  which 
accon;)  J  s  it  causes  it  to  be  felt  as  something  more  emphatic. 
Compare,  1  >\  v  er,  the  close  of  Or.  31,  already  cited  for  the  apos- 
Uupac  ,  the  explanation  given  for  the  argumentative  use  of  that 
figure  irnl  r>  also  to  the  interrogation  which  is  combined  with  it ; 
compare  also  3O.  11  {xairo'.  ei  rjv  iSia  rtT  d<fop/irj  muzwi  Tzpdq  tj 
TparzO^rj,  ri  drj  rzor*  av  eUero  ruuro  fidXXov  rj  xsi'^Tjv  ;).  It  is  indeed  in 
hypothetical  sentences  having  a  question  as  one  of  their  members 
th.i  Demosthenes  approaches  nearest  to  the  tone  of  simple 
argument ;  but  if  we  contrast  the  passage  just  quoted  with  29.  20 

(xaizot  £1  yWjV  douAo^ — ri  [lai^iuv  iiiaprupriffz^^y  alk^  oux  i^ofio(Ta<;  dTZTjXXdyjj 
T»u  TT/jct^/zttTo^ ;),  we  see  how  the  hypothetical  form  modifies  the 
vehemence  of  the  interrogative  expression,  which,  with  the  omis- 
sion of  av,  springs  back  to  its  natural  attitude  of  aggressive  force. 
Appeal,  whether  pathetic  or  indignant,  is  very  common  ;  under 
this  head  may  be  included  especially  sentences  beginning  with 
elra  or  apa,  if.  28.  1 8  (a/>*  00  fieydXa — /5/arro/xaj ;)  ;  36.56,  45.  70 
(£T»^*  8v  opdr'  —  ou  Ttfiioprjffeff^'^e;),  54.  20 ;  also  those  in  which  a 
erh  of  thinking,  or  a  corresponding  expression,  makes  an  appeal 
to  the  ;  i  lion  of  the  judges,  as  in  30.  20  {xairoi  rtp  rowV  v[iwv 
TZKTTov ;),  57.  26  (ohraL  t:t  dv  x.  r.  X.)  ;  and  finally  the  simple 
exclamation  seen  in  30.  36  {roozuo  yhoiz'  dv  nq  (TxerXiU)Z£po<: 
d^i^pwTTo':  0,  J  \   28  {zi  <>i» — do^et]). 

The  asseii    c  question  comprises  notably  the  numerous  sen- 
tences which  begin  with  rtSc  or  ttcDt  ou.     Thus,  in  29.  55,  the 


) 


17 

demand,  ttw^  dv  duvatzo  ztr:  (rafifrzepov  i^eXiy^ai,  is  onlv  a  rhetorical 

mode  of  saying  oux  dv  duvatzo  t£c  <Ta<p,  i^.:  and  in  :      i  s  the  exi  les- 

sion,  TTcoT  ou  <pav£pdv  ozi — ^tjzolxtiv^  differ':-   ^n^v   rhnn  •■■'iranv'   iri>m 
the  dijXov  fisv  roivuv — ozt — zoXiidjffi  7:pazT£t>   :ii  tin   sinic    i  <ar.icra|)li. 


},i!  r 


il!-l,C 


belongfs  ai>'>  nt  m.inx'  = -i'  iht^ 


.  i  f  ^  • 


a/    00/ Ui' 


Compare  also,  in  38.  .n;    ni 

pXv  oux  "{(TO,.      The  same  v a 

tions  introduced    by  an  ina;rogati\e  piuiiuiin  ;    ci.  36. 

oliiai   T^c  ffj^'Z  dTtXrjffzia^ — zt^   u/   dhvaiz''  k(pixi(Tho.LZZLoud£Lq 

i<pixi<7f^ai)^   41.    7   {zi  dv  k'zL  ix£iXov   x.   z.   A.),    i"..  41    (-'-   -'/o   ouzu)-: 

d<ppwv  X.  r.  X,). 

The  tone  of  the  ch  a'icn-e  i^  etai\  felt;  thr  speaker  -((nis  to 
demand  an  answer  to  his  quciUiju  and  at  the  -^diriL  time  to  be  cuii- 
fident  that  no  answer  is  possible;  cf  2e^  41   ("^^^^  '(^>'-'  (/'eudofiap- 

zupiwv  i7C£(Txrj^>uj]  d£'i^ov.  dXX'  oux  dv  £^01';  d£i^at^  :  37.  2'>  ^-^^  ynn^  £? 
xazi(rzr^fT£v  Eu£pyo':^  kyd)  <r'  ddixu)  ;),  wliere  the  \-;v;(i  and  ijnei  apos- 
trophic  interrogation  turn;-  d;c  .tr^n-nt-m  .ntf  a  detniiice  :  41,  22 
{zi  drj  ttot' — auzcbvy)^  ^;,  ^5  (eir'  iyib  ^ivo^'.  t^od  fiezoixtov  xazay^et'Z  :), 
The  distinction  between  these  four  classes  is  a  >in  a  ctivt  iiie. 
dependent  on  the  re  adrr'«  (rrVr-^  •  the  fifth   r  h    s  1  1 


P^ 


.  n t- 
ail 


an 


I  ( ■• 


character,  which  rendr  in    t  nnnd 

apart  from  the  others.     W 

value;  it  is  a  bit  of  current  coin. 

question  e^'r  7r/>o<T«/>;'v,  to  arouse  attention;    i 

accepted  if  we  permit  ourselves  to  under*;' 

does  Rehdantz — who  object-    in  t   '      rx   n- 

hearer   is   the   object   of  every  rhetorical    1 

referring  to  the  content  of  the  question     h  > 

what  the  speaker  is  about  to  say  and  ixi  n    tixeo  tner  aiteiit  on 

upon   it ;   cf.    27.   38   {^uv   dk  zi  nocoufftv  ;)  ;   41.  5   {zivo'^  ouv  eFvsx* — 

£}-::ov  ;)  ;   37.  26  (ttoit  ouv — ypdi^at ;)  ;   57.  T  '     "  — EuiSouXidr)  ;). 

The   suggestive   question   imparts  liveime>s  t     nanative;  the 


nn' 


a  ni:.ii 

■ .    t  hiTi  (r 

Un  ' 

^  '-•.  I  :  ^A  r-     '..  -A  i  iy^     1 1  i  C 
■  *  ■  T '  r  M      "^  ^  t  -  J  \ '      t  '\f^ 

.    ^ .     i     i  i  i  -,  i    *  1  i     V  t.y  V^ 

!  t ' -ii!  ■  ■■  ai  s'a  die 
r.: jtaan-d)nL  ;iS 
t-  Uj  Uit'  ujnees 


,  N  t 


.\  ..  1 


challenge  is  bold  and  emphatic, 
genuine  private  orations;  I  have  noted: 
in  eight  speeches  (27.  38,  29.  8.  11.  10 
29.  36.  37-  50.  38.  25,  39.  13.  29.  35.  37,  4:    : 
17.  61.  68),  of  the  second  in  nine  (2"    7    2     4 
20.  31.  54,  37.  26.  28.  54.  67,  38.  in     6,  39.  i 
22,45.38.84).     The  absence  of  enia  ;    m 
would  therefore  not  seem  to  be  in  itself  t        1 
ness ;  but  it  may  add  greater  weight  to  (  nn  r 


fnnd 


a^: 


tise 


,  1 


Uie  tir>l  i>n.v 


i  t  i-]\^- 


(.l:cai  .ui 


i8 


19 


ness  or  lack  of  spirit,  defects  by  no  means  Demosthenean.  It  is 
to  be  observed  also  that  eleven  out  of  the  fourteen  speeches 
exhibit  one  or  the  other  of  these  two  kinds  of  question,  and  that 
Or.  54.  which  shows  only  the  suggestion  in  indirect  form  (§13), 
and  Ur.  jS^  which  contains  neither  kind,  have  in  common  a  certain 
modesty  of  tone  mingled  with  pathetic  warmth,  to  which  the 
k  ness  of  the  challenge  and  the  rather  dramatic  pose  of  the 
suggestion  are  essentially  foreign. 

Rhetorical  Answer, 

The  rhetorical  question  may  be  answered  rhetorically ;   and 

this  answer  may  be  put  either  as  an  expression  of  opinion  or  as  an 

assertion  of  fact.     So  we  find  in  31.  5  lixoi  [xkv  ydp  oodkv  av  doxel  ] 

in  31.  II  =r^  f^^^  "^^^^  o}fiat,  which  latter  phrase  reappears  under 

varying  forms  in  ten  other  passages  :  31.  13,  37.  37,  38.  12,  39.  24, 

45.  13,  54.  20.  22.  43,  55.  13,  57-  35-'     Corresponding  affirmative 

tx:    essions  are  ^y^o  injiat,  29.  34;  v"7'<^-''  r'«^  ^^'?.  30-  3°  J  h^f  "*' 

<pairiv,  45.  65.    Or  a  verb  of  knowing  may  be  used  with  a  negative; 

compare  oox  inda  in  27.  48  and  29.  24,  and  the  similar  use  of  £/w 

in  27.  63  and  29.  57.     As  a  more  emphatic  form  of  reply  we  have 

obx  k'(TTt  raura,  27.  57,  29.  49,  57.  53  ;   oox  i/zt  raur'  dkr^H^ta-^,  30.  34  ; 

and  the  various  combinations  ol  nhdi  with  other  words  in  27.  59, 

36.  19.  25,  39.  40,  45-  12,  55.  13,  57-  55-      So  too  obx  hztrzi  drjrzoo^'^ev, 

;j    r    aui  the  ti:    !nativer:avt»;'£,  39.  14.     In  37.  56.  60  and  38.  22 

wi_  nn i  what  corresponds  to  these  replies  in  form,  but  scarcely  in 

force,  an  appeal  expressed  by  fir^da/iw^. 

The  effect  of  these  phrases  is  to  impress  the  speaker's  opinion 
or  conviction  upon  the  mind  of  the  hearer.  The  same  purpose  is 
served  by  similar  curt  utterances  following  on  a  supposition,  as  in 
31.  _2  ^oux  effTt  raura),  39.  20  (obx  iywy  rjyobfiat),  45.  45  (ob  drj-roo), 
Oftener  this  form  of  contradiction  is  introduced  by  aXXd  ;  cf.  29.  39 
(a/A'    obx^    rotobrov   iffzv^),   ib.   4 1    (aAx'   obx    TJdtxrjfievo^    coxixpa^^relq'), 

1  21.  5  kfjuH  fiev  yap  ov6h>  av  SoKel  tovtov  fxel^^ov  evpe-^f/vni^  and  54-  22  iyu  ^lev 
yap  ov6'  anodavdvr''  olfiai,  show  in  the  use  of  the  causative  particle  a  slight 
divergence  from  the  usual  asyndetic  form  of  the  rhetorical  answer  ;  and 
there  is  a  more  substantial  difference  in  the  fact  that  the  words  e'vpEdfjvaL  and 
dTFoi^av^vr'  introduce  a  conception  not  found  in  the  preceding  sentence.  In 
the  first  case  this  is  unimportant,  as  the  verb  conveys  really  the  same  idea 
as  that  expressed  by  fieiL,ov  dv  ri  yivotro  ;  but  the  amplification  in  drroti^avdvr* 
ought  perhaps  to  prevent  us  from  regarding  this  passage  as  purely  rhetor- 
ical. 


( 


36.  ii,37-37»4i-  26,54.41,57.25.49.51.  So  in  29.59  and  41.20 
we  have  emphatic  parentheses  after  a  negaUve  assertion  ;  in  36.  54 
the  sentence,  obx  r^Sixou^  dXX^  olfiat  (Tuxo<pavT£l^  vDv,  follows  on  a 
question,  less  as  an  answer  than  as  a  refutation  of  the  implied 
hypothesis. 

As  lucid  argument  and  firm  construction  are  among  the  recog- 
nized excellences  of  Demosthenes,  it  will  be  s  r*  h  while  to  inquire 
into  the  mechanical  means  by  which  he  acli.cvcb  liiis  clearness 

and  solidity. 

Deictic  Expressions, 

Two  particles  seem  of  especial  importance  as  constructive 
elements :  rotVov,  and  "wv  in  the  combination  ixk^  obv.  Both  are 
employed  to  mark  the  introduction  of  an  important  statement,  a 
new  incident,  or  a  fresh  link  in  the  chain  of  reasoning ;  they  serve 
in  a  formal  way  to  call  attention  to  what  is  about  to  be  said  Tie 
attention  of  the  hearers  is  also  engaged  and  fixed  upon  a  desired 
point  by  a  free  use  in  emphatic  positions  of  the  tieiit  -n  1  i^ 
ouTo^,  roiobxozy  roffouru^,  ixeivo^ ;  and  a  more  open  dcina  1  :s  made 
upon  them  by  the  employment  of  verbs  and  ver:  ..:  phrnscF. 
Thus  we  find,  pointing  forward,  the  futures  det=oj,  dtda^w^  etoedin, 
y.wffeffiie;  the  imperatives  (rxoTs'ire,  (Txii^'atr^'^e,  dxabcrare ;  \]]c  phrases 
del,  or  i^iknov  k(Tri,  u/id^  fxai%v^,  or  dxobffat]  pointing  back w.; id,  :he 
perfects  dxrjxi'mre^  iiejiaHrjxare^  tiefiafnbpTjzai.  There  are  also  the 
expressions  ^/^kov  ian,  <pa>£p6v  iart^  ^adiov  itJTi  /xa»^£Tv  ;  the  introduc- 
tion of  testimony  is  often  prefaced  by  wc,  or  or^,  dkr^^  kiyw ;  and 
in  the  same  connection  a  summary  of  facts  i  *  -'  given.  The 
variety  .:  i^uch  phrases  is  scarcely  indicated  by  liiose  quoted;  and 
the  effect  of  variety  is  increased  by  the  habit  of  employing  several 
together;  thus  ?v'  eidrje  is  often  followed  by  w<;  dlrfii^  Xiyw^  the 
latter  often  by  a  summary  of  facts.  Cf.  38.  9,  where  we  have  ore 
fxev  ob>  ,  .  ,  .  Ixavw^  rravrar  rjouixat  iitixay^xhai^  oTt  d*  offrspo^  .... 
robro  ^obXofiai  drt^at,  with  a  recital  of  facts  that  have  bet  n  t  i  :e 
to  be  stated.  A  similar  arrangement  is  found  in  54.  i^,  id 
while  not  all  combinations  are  equally  full,  the  accumulation  of 
several  deictic  words  or  phrases  is  always  a  notable  feature. 

It  is  as  important  to  note  the  limitation  of  such  expressioi 
their  use;  both  are  well  illustrated  in  Or    j:      About  six  ^ 
of  that  speech,  sections  1-59,  are  taken      1     v  lii  lia.    m    ■<  it 
the  case;  and  here  we  find  iiev  om  nine  times, roc'vt^v  twei  ly  : 
some  two  dozen  emphatic  demonstratives  and  as  manv  ip.oii 


IS 
:S 

Mf 


.  t:S 


20 


t[if."\' 


SI)t-CuIl, 


All 


-.  •■  n  r  >'• 


verbs.  So  far  the  movement  of  the  speech  is  deliberate  and 
ree^il'^r  •  in  snitp  of  the  outburst  in  §47-8  we  feel  that  the  orator  has 
h  :il^r  ■   V        :    !ii!   i  and  is  bent  only  on  reasoning  and  convincing. 

A    liif   jkl:  Ki    :  <     ■    ^'^o  lie  reminds  the  judges  in   ^fX  plirns*^  of 

lie  1!  (i  {rotTaurt]":  rohuv  ouffia':  .  ,  .  otnrjv  .  .  ,  rjxouaare)^ 
:t  u,  I-  :  an  tA\  a^^  Mich  restraints  on  \\\^  flood 
_  -  .  li  •  e  close  in  a  ia[ d  torrent  of  crowding 
sentences,  which  breat.ic  mingled  denunciation  and  ■  aty. 
n  til's  passage,  -vp  find  none  of  the  deictic  uuciances 
i  Hjve,  \  omes  plain  where  their  province  lies;  tl.<  y 
10  demoi  :;  ;  n  nd  are  expelled  by  the  intrusion  of 
ii  found  ":  I  .nsionate  passage,  the)  ::.:rudiately  give 
I  :  t  iui.,:^c,  ail  attempt  at  restraint ;  compare,  in  36.  48. 
t  VI  it  11!  h^ck  imposed  on  the  current  of  denunciation  by 
ih;      kiu-tM  ;?.;:;;  ^  aXkd  fiijv  ort^  Tjyovixai  rohov^  toutw./  tolvuv. 

Ahiiu  ^  1  r  t  t  !>  uticles  t  '  deictic  phrases  do  not  belong  to 
e  n  >n  u  .1  ai  ii  .  their  frequency  seems  hardly  to  stand  in 
inverse  ratiu  lu  liic  predominance  of  the  latter.  A  rough  calcu- 
lation n.s  to  the  proportion  of  such  expressions  in  each  speech 
yields  the  following  result: 


No.  of  pages 

No.  of  deictic 

Or. 

(Tcubner). 

expressions. 

proportion 

38 

8 

33 

4-125 

36 

i7i 

63 

3.6 

27 

20 

68 

34 

31 

4 

13 

3.25 

30 

loj 

33 

3-14 

29 

17 

50 

2.9 

37 

17 

46 

2.7 

57 

2oi 

53 

2.59 

45 

25 

62 

2.48 

41 

Si 

21 

2.47 

39 

iii 

26 

2.26 

55 

9i 

X9 

2 

54 

14 

27 

1.9 

28 

7 

12 

1.7 

vould  seem  to  indicate  a  relation  between  these  phrases 
ai.u  me  predominance  or  subordination  of  the  legal  element  in  a 
speech ;  for  we  find  at  the  head  of  the  list  Or.  38  (tt/ooc  Nauffifxa-j^ov 
xai  3£wo7t£i»^>),  which  deals  chiefly  with  a  point  of  law,  Or.  36  (uTzkp 


21 


)i't'i 


es 


0upfjLtu)>o^),  delivered  by  an  advocate,  and  the  lawyer-lik 

of  Demosthenes  himself ;  near  the  foot  the  two     i  ,-     n-.    4 

55,  especially  marked  by  Wflzz/^/^  and  simplitiv  <i       in.  01  r 

'A  n":^h  turns  on  no  point  of  law,  ani;  ^  *::-..-   ..u  ■  --^-  :iH".tker  d  wiihii 

announces  himself  as  a  quiet  citizen,     rn    1  -u  iiu  t 

as  for  Or.  .|o,  lar  more  of  its  considerable  li.  iii:ih 


>  s    ( '  i: ' 


..(.. 


IS 


;c  (1 


iiii 


vilification  than  to  argument,  uuc  indet 
by  the  author,  28  (xard  'A<f6,3ou  ,3'),  sfand-  la-i 
is  interesting  to  observe  the  difference    m  twt  < 
being  epilogues  and  boll    'u:   -:  wan:!,  .lui 
begins  with  an  argument;  but  the  fom    i   p 
and  appeal,  the  latter  continues  w  i        r      n 
the  adversary's  pleas.     That  is  to  say     ih-: 
moved   by  passion,  would  not  argue 
formulas  which  made  for  lucidity,  while  iii   liir 
already  familiar  to  the  hearers  he  .  ' mdoned  li 
impeded  flow  of  rapid  utterance;  on  ur    i  liu 
influence  of  rjf^or.otia  and  the   sensitiveness 
degree   to  which  this    born  reasone  r  subci  1 
emphatic  and  pointed  demonstration  when     1 
sonages  as  Ariston  (in  the  speech    u:  t  ;  -     ( 
unnamed  adversaries  of  Spue  ..    ...A  Callicles. 

Transitions. 


-prtrC 

»,j  i  1    111 


\v- 1  a 


:  ii!  i 


■()! 


V 


\i 


1  f 


il  -i 


\Vf 


ni 


•  \v 


:  i  it 


'('(■ 


>:v. 

il'V 

of 

■:vA 


! 


U   i" 


/uon),  or 


'  (  s 


ill' 


.1.1 


Hi    (..'1 


the    rarfful 

.  .-ij'  ai:(  r  of 


This  love  of  clearness  is  especially  ob-rr\ 
deliberateness  with  which  the  orator  passes  in 
the  main  divisions  of  a  speech.  1  ;a  transition  n  •  1  '  '  *  -1  ^• 
narrative  was  hardly  neglected  even  by  inferior  u  riters,  si  11  m^ 
prooemium  itself  had  a  certain  fixity  of  form,'  but  that  fron  1  r  - 
tive  to  argument,  or  any  shift  of  topic,  is,  wiui  Dtrinobihcntib,  hauiiii- 
ally  marked  and  emphasized.  Compare  2".  "  where  the  nn^snce 
from  the  statement  of  the  case  to  that  concerning  the  am  ih-  t 
the  property  is  elaborately  defined  :  y.a\  to  fikv  x£(fdXaiov  .  .  .  tout'  jyv 
.  .  .  TO  8k  TzXy^tq  .  .  .  on  tout'  rjv  x.  r.  /.  Cor:  ire  also  the  intiu- 
duction  of  the  argument  in  29.  10,  45.  7,  o7-  ^7  >  "^^^  closing  of  the 
narrative  in  30.9,  36.  18,  37.  17;  the  elaborate  transition  ?ron) 
narrative  to  critici  n  :  the  adversary's  de^n^e  in  54  13  S  :  ii 
passages,  which  r  land  out  like  seams  in  the  oratorical  web,  u  1  nc  • 

» Though,  as  will  be  seen  later,  the  difference  in  tone  at  this  point  some- 
times serves  to  distinguish  the  greater  from  the  lesser  artist. 


22 

linking  and  defining  its  different  sections,  are  too  obvious  to  call 
for  much  comment ;  some  curious  exceptions  in  Or.  38  deserve 
more  notice.  The  formal  prooemium  of  that  speech  seems  to  end 
with  the  words  iSorji^trat  fun  ra  Sixata,  found  also  in  other  prooemia 
(27.  3, 45.  2,  54,  2),  but  there  followed  by  some  deictic  phrase  intro- 
ductory of  the  narrative.  Here,  on  the  contrary,  there  follows,  as 
if  in  [  ii  nthesis,  a  sentence,  explanatory  of  the  words  /xry  7r/)o<njzov- 
roc  iyxXijiiazoZy  which  would  naturally  be  placed  within  the  pro- 
oemium, as  would  also  the  next  sentence,  ri^v  [ih  oJv  .  .  .  etffetr^e. 
Til, It  they  are  really  beyond  its  limits,  or,  if  we  like,  that  it  has  no 
definite  limit,  appears  from  the  immediate  introduction  of  the 
testimony  on  which  the  opening  argument  is  to  be  based,  and 
which  takes  the  place  of  a  d'.rjr^frt^;  after  having  thus  stated  his 
ra-p  vicariously,  the  speaker  proceeds  to  that  discussion  of  the 
demurrer,  which  is  the  real  body  and  substance  of  the  speech,  and 
this  he  prefaces  by  a  series  of  deictic  phrases  which,  in  their 
nearness  to  the  incomplete  prooemium,  seem  to  stand  for  its 
formal  conclusion,  hi  i.u  i  the  prooemium  is  constructed  with 
exceeding  looseness,  and  the  <hrjyrjfTiq  is,  so  to  speak,  telescoped  into 
it.  Looking  further  at  the  singularly  abrupt  introduction  of  new 
arguments  in  §23  (^oox  ifiifri^uxrwj  x,  t.  ^.),  and  at  the  "  purple  patch" 
in  §21  J-.  vvhich  overweights  the  short  speech  and  is  less  fitly 
placed  than  as  epilogue  to  Or.  37  (r/^or  Uavrahemv)^  we  may  con- 
jecture that,  in  handling  this  slight  case,  Demosthenes  saved  time 
and  trouble  by  declining  the  labor  of  careful  construction.  The 
imperfections  furnish,  however,  no  good  reason  for  doubting  the 
genuineness  of  the  oration,  which  not  only  has  many  D  inos- 
thenic  features,  but  is,  even  in  its  scamped  state,  notably  lucid  and 
effective,  and  1.^  not  to  be  called  inartistic,  but  rather  the  unfinished 
P^nHuct  of  a  manifest  artist. 

Prooemia. 

hu  a  careless  dealing  with  the  prooemium  is  the  more  notice- 
able, because  some  of  the  speeches  show  in  precisely  this  pa:  ,1 
remarkable  stibtlefv  and  delicacy  of  finish.  In  the  earliest  orations, 
indeed,  the  11  i  ction  has  only  the  excellence  of  a  severe  correct- 
ness ;  that  of  (i:  :;  ;s  a  simple  capiatio  benevoleniiae,  that  of  Or. 
30  a  conflatio  invidiae,  while  these  elements  are  mingled  in  ^  " 
29;  in  the  Luo  latter  a  :=LtLement  of  the  points  at  issue  is  added 
(29.  5,  30.  4   -^      Rut  in  turning  to  the  prooemium  of  36  uu  find 


'   I'hi 


»  >(■ 


hr 


i'.K' 


)  \\ 


•  inr 


i  - 


Lit 


on, 
the 


t 


t\'  whi'/h  the 

..id:! \'  <  >i   the 

: : riL;  .iiKiO'  >; u- 

>v\  and    iaucia- 

and   \\\v   rn):il 

;( »rnia!   t ran- 

A  = .! ;  i!\-  HiKirpnrss  and 

jcCLli  ill  the  iiit^IlLiOn 


.  K  •  \  ( 


23 

ourselves  in  contact  with  a  much  finer  and  more  original  piece  of 

workmanship.     This  compact  little  masterpiece  fulfills  indeed  all 

conventional  purposes  by  exciting  good-will  for  one  part^ 

dice  against  the  other,  and  defining  the  poii  i 

there  is  no  conventionality  in  the  exquisiia  ^\ 

and  the  effect  produced  may  be  compared  t^ 

overture,  which  does  not  merely  prefar 

but  indicates  its  tone  and  character. 

opening  words  foreshadows  the  fine  ini;u  i 

advocate  maintains  throughout;  the  w an 

sentence  o^ra  yap  (7uxo(pa'^TeT,  with  its  aiiUbn 

thon,  breathes  the  spirit  of  all  that  ardent 

tion  to  which  so  much  of  the  speech  is 

sentence,  i^  «/>;f'7? — dxoofravreq^  while  constitu:  r; 

sition  to  the  narrative,  sums  up  with 

emphatic  brevity  the  whole  purpose  oi  ihc  b\ 

of  the  two  main  topics — the  point  of  law  (w?  oux  eKraywyiiioz  ij  dixyf) 

and  the  rascality  of  Apollodorus(TryV  rouzou  (Tuxo<pa>Tiav).  A  iidnor 

delicacy  of  more  mechanical  sort,  but  imprniaa  f 

comparison,  lies  in  the  fact  that    i;   ss  is  laid  .  n  da 

demurrer  (rijv  fikv  ouw — zy/?:'a),  while  the  8'i'ouiil>  -  ;i  .\ 

are  only  incidentally  touched  upon,     bu  hi  i  )r. 

makes  only  an  allusion  to  the  a(p£(7L<;  xai  ar.akXayr^     h 

the  character  of  his  defense,  which  will  rest  •  n  lia 

{jDoSh  rjdixrjxa  TOUT  ov')  ?ind  on  the  illegd  :\    <  !   da    a 

voixov  X.  T.  k.),  and  then  foreshadows  its  -pa  i     v  a 

cutting  denunciation  of  the  audarity  ot  i'lniatia' 

^7re7ro>»^£j    x.  r,  I.  ;  obdh  ij8ix7jri£/<>i   ....  (^uxn^av'. 

reroA/jtijz£>).     This    introduction    wldle    sta-nped   w 

character  of  suggestiveness   dat  beloni;-  i     that 

inferior  to  it  in  comprehensiveness  and  ar  .tra  a- 

the  other  hand,  is  the  very  brief  and  rlc^s 

of  Or.  45.'     The  suit,  brought  ao^ain^t   M' 

meant  as  an  attack  on  Phormio,  and   i  a 

double  nature:   xaTail'eudojiapTUprj^'^e.iq — ia    a 


W'  a,a; 


\\  t 


■■  a  1  r '  Si  i-> ?->    C)  1 

adiaat    <  >!    'he 

aai  :i  :-.  aast'd 

■  tiu-   >ia'akar 

wn  amaaaaa'a:' 
taan  {r:apd  tov 
xai'C/ruU:^  and 

S    (2    ~l  /J.£V   GOV 

~  ". /a5v   .    ,    .   . 
i .       I » a. .      >  (,  1 1 J  i  ?,, 

a  li).  \>  inucli 
a.:maaiida,  an 

;     p'-'i  *.  Kailaini 

'  •  r   p ^ ■  r a i r \a  is 


\>  Peti  =Kap  :ts 
ank    It  worth 


'  I  do  not  wish  to  seem  unduly  to  depreciate  the  admirable  .k  aen  ium 
of  Or.  37,  which,  in  its  loftiness  of  tone  and  lajtae-s  of  outline,  weil 
balances  the  magnificent  epilogue  of  the  same     1   a  a  'a   k-   Pie   pecu 

liar  preluding  quality  and  the  brilliant  condensation  to  u        .    \     ita-ac  :o 
call  attention. 


24 


vvbile  to  say  by  whom,  but  hurries  on  to  the  real  author  of  the 
laise  testimony — xai  Tta^^wv  o-ku  ^fopfiiwvo'z  o^piffztxfk  xat  deivd;  and 
it  ':ie  end  he  repeats  this  double  charge  in  chiastic  form  (rij'v  t* 
ixeivou   r.ovTjpiav  .  .  .  xai  rourow:  or^   rd   (/'eudr^  /lefiapropTJxafft) ;   while 
Let  AC  comes  a  touch  of  Apollodorean  plaintiveness  (//^^a  yap  nn^ 
rjzox/j^o(ri,'  X.  r.  f.,  cf.  §§57,  85),  and  then  a  summary  of  the  three 
mn'n   oo'i^t-   -n  the  denunciation  of  Stephanus — that  he  has  per- 
jur    1  h     ;  elt,  and  that  for  money,  and  stands  self-convicted  ;  this 
I)  1:  Aii:  lie  most  vigorous  bare  curtness  in  swift  participial  con- 
str  ivi    .11  aiKi  clinched  with  an  asyndetic  phrase  which  is  rendered 
i    ubly  emphatic  by  its  unusual  position  in  the  very  beginning  of 
tin  -;/-!:        \  similar  initial  sharpness  of  suggestion  appears  in 
:;n   ti:      u    :  i  ot  Or.  54,  6/5/>£<r»^£t'^ ;  for  the  plaintiff,  who  brings  a 
ii  1  .4'      I   y  of  atxta,  regards  Conon  as  guilty  of  f>/^/'£<?,  and  this 
C'  i:  '  ption  he  enforces  upon  the  judges  from  the  start,  and  Justi- 
ne.^ lj\  the  words  immediately  following,  xa\  Ttaiiwv  .  . .  -nepiipen^eay^ai 
fiz  wh'ch  are  significant  in  their  simplicity ;  they  tell  nothing  of  the 
111  timer  of  the     tT  nse,  which  is  here  immaterial,  but  reveal  in  full 
its  conse<,  :   :  ces  to  serve  as  pendant  and  righteous  apology  to  the 
lit     I  ii    e  v^'tt'  av  i^a'^dz(to  xpivaq  znorov.     Here  the  note  is  struck 
.v:     li  -  lu  dominate  the  whole;  so,  too,  in  55.  i,  where  the  plain- 
t     '     r   n  ction,  oox  tj'^  .  ,  .  ruyzv^^  harmonizes  with  the  naive  and 
itory  tone  of  the  speech,  and  at  the  same  time  givts  with 
4  novelty  of  form  the  common  disclaimer  of  litigicjusne.ss. 
A     a  brief  recital  of  facts  to  support  the  accusation  con- 
\\  urds  TTo'^r^pou  xai  xXeovixroo  ;  and  the  transition  to  the 
;s  made  by  an  appeal  which  reflects  the  diffident  modesty 
k   r  in  the  words  o'j;^ — ££-£?>,  and  his  strong  sense  of 
^  ;  ;  al,  and  therefore  more  emphatic,  <fauepw^  auxoKfav- 


c  X : 


.  i .  n  t '  u 


mjur> 
Toufiai, 


h-hewn  prooemium  of  38,  the  only  point  to  be  espe- 
cially nuicd  \^,  mat  here,  as  in  36  and  37,  the  argument  on  the 
-apaypaif-q  is  n nt  anticipated.  That  of  41  has  a  touch  of  sug- 
;^:e-':M-   (|iKd  tv    ::   the  opening    v       !s  (^ddektfd^  h^opev  w  a.  d.  yova't- 

\\  establish  a  reason  for  the  reserve  that  char- 

rvt  r  s  language,  while  the  quiet  simplicity  of  the 

agrees   with  the  unemphatic  tone   of  the  short 

e  rnnrliid-iiir  words  of  the  prologue  ((V"'?  «.  *r.  ^.) 

-  n   ■  ^:u  •  (§307?«.)  are  alike  singularly  untinged 

habitual  in  such  ap^    -    .     In  the  prooemium  of 


xac   X,  r.  i.). 
acterizes  tii 

whole     Da-- 


V«,' 


25 


39  a  narrative  is  smoothly  interwoven  with  the  deprecatio  i7ividiae 
which  constitutes  its  essential  purport  (cf.  §1  no/h'tta  (pOMizpay- 
pLoffu'^r^  ;  ^6y  ot)y  ooTw  (Txatoq')  ;  this  exceptional  a:  sii^;;:  nt  niuli 
logical  and  artistically  effective,  inasmin  h  a-  it  t  \a  n>  i  anatt  a  , 
while  yielding  excellent  gr!:nl  f  :  tiiC  assti  a 
is  not  actuated  by  a  spirit  of  mere  perversit 
subject  of  the  argumentation,  that  is,  do  not  an  -•  1:0  : 
dtrjyr^(Tt^  in  the  strict  sense  of  that  term.     The   cii   r acte^ 


'   i  i    a  ; .  1  ^    ;  a ',  ■   i  a  a ,  i  a,  a . 

^  ^  i\i  >    a;  •!    a  a"!  a    •  ht 


!  a.  I 


•  a, 


whole  is  slightly  foreshadowed  in  the  absence  of  canaia  ;:  < 
methods  by  which  the  adoption  was  la  a  kt  t  at  n  t;a  -ti-a 
laid  on  the  speaker's  fulfilment  of  all  i^a^al  clamis  (§6  to  rptrov 
veipaffi^ai  pipoq)^  and  in  the  cumulative  a^  a:tu  a  a  :;  {zl<7r^yay\ 
i::zoi7J(TaTo  .  .  .  iyypd(ptC)^  a  figure  especially  freq-s  it  a  t:a:>  -i  <m  ch 
and  here  affording  a  brief  hint  of  the  rapidity  an;  w.  la  t;  \\h  ah 
are  to  prevail  throughout.  Finally,  the  unusnah.  i.  a.:  1  i  (  lai am 
of  57  is  the  speech  in  miniature,  a  pathetic  and  anxioar  11  {<  al 
with  flashes  of  vehemence  cautiously  restrained:  at  c  t>a  iv  of 
the  whole  in  manner,  not  in  matter,  since  here  the  ai  ih  h  is  bast  d 
on  general  considerations  proper  to  ihc  par  \  tnblic  sphere  of 
the  case. 


II. — Comparison  v^^ith  Lysias  and  Isai  is. 

It  need  hardly  be  said  that  none  of  the  figures  ar  ah:  ;  s  wh  h 
have  been  reviewed  is,  any  more  taa,  the  jirooemiiaa  t-th  ti]c 
exclusive  property  of  Demosthenes;  it  is  oia\  t:a  aannar  of 
handling  the  common  material  that  reveals  t  a  i  a  -  a  a  1  1 1  a- 
ment  and  artistic  power.  A  brief  comp  r  «  a  u  ah  ua  a  at:?^  t 
his  two  chief  predecessors  in  forensic  oratoia  1  a,  ha-  iid  l-<a  i;-, 
may  enable  us  more  clearly  to  define  his  indi  iduahtv  nd  naat- 
easily  to  discover  or  deny  its  presence  in  comp^  -  ta  a-  i  :  dc  nbtiul 
authorship.     In  studvino-   L)-D..i^  I  ':  txa-  %at  .aa  .a"  i.a.n-!(a,a  atiiai 


u.'aa 


\-  ^ 


V     '  I,,    i    .   '..      i    .        ^.  fc    ,      V.'    ,        i      -.    ,       »,  \J     ;    , 


not  only  the  orations  iia  ;k' H  as  spui 
but  also  Orr.  8,  11,  33,  and  34.  The  iir  t  .luc  liaid  i  tla  -t  aia^ 
epideictic;  the  second  is,  as  Scheiba  ?  a  a-  n  pit'  lae  i  10; 
the  last    is  a  mere    fragment.     This   is   wm      iidtad    *  i    >a\i]ui 

speeches  included  in  luy  iiuu) ,  ^an  thtp  .it  ]-:i^i  hcl.aip  to  ma 
judicial  sphere,  while  the  speech  on  ia  c  aisLtina  n  a-  fh  a  hic  latix  t. 
The  C"'^:p  td-^.'^  u^'di  Lysias  is  in  :iia.-  CA:^i^  a^>s  c^xaat  tbaii  tliat 
with  Isaeus,  as  onl\  t  aw  of  the  lorn  a 
23,  32)  belong  to  the  class  of  idnonxoi. 


xtant  >paeciia; 


26 


Denujiciation. 

The  denunciatory  epithets  employed  not  infrequently  by  Isaeus 
have  much  the  same  range  and  tone  as  the  Demosthenean  :  (i\iai- 

cyo^^ro:;,  -ia,  -eiv,  I.  8.  26.  47,  3.  35.  40.  72,  6.  54,  8.  13.  40,  II.  14  ; 
d^^atdrj:;,  -cfct,  I.  2.  7,  ,2.  28,  3.  18.  67,  4.  I9,  6.  I3.  43.  46,  7.  21.  23, 
II.  6;  Tzoyrjfw:;,  -ia  3.  39.  40,  5.  13.  35,  6.  55,  II.  20 ;  aiaxp^txipdeta 
1.8;  fitapia  5.  11;  dliixia  5.  31  ;  r.Xeove^ia  8.  2,  1 1.  36  ;  dvonux;  4.  19  ; 
cyi'l'uz  IT.  6  ;  under  the  same  head  may  be  brought  (fLXoypriiiare'tv 
10.  i/.  Words  of  this  class  are  wanting  in  Or.  12,  a  fragment 
devoid  01  aii  rhetorical  coloring,  and  in  Or.  9,  ui-re  their 
absence  might  be  attributed  to  rj^or.oiia^  if  the  sympathetic  plas- 
ticity which  this  word  imphes  could  be  otherwise  discovered  in 
the  somewhat  uniform  and  rigid  style  of  Isaeus.  He  may  in  this 
case  hiv  e  cxercio<  d  i  reserve  imposed  by  the  position  or  character 
of  his  client,  but  the  latt-  '^  i  -  sonality  is  not  otherwise  felt,  and 
the  absence  of  'tiiperation  lails  therefore  to  have,  as  '  I^emos- 
thenes,  .*  i:  ;  tylistic  effect.'  The  sphere  of  the  Lysianic 
speeciic-  -cms  in  general  to  render  a  detailed  comparison  on 
this  point  superfluous;  in  those  which  enter  into  consideration  we 
find  yjixia  §10.  28,  dvai(jyu'^zia  §32.  20,  rzovrjpta  ib.  §23.  In  Or.  3, 
A  ■  ':  Dionysius  compares  with  the  speech  against  Conon  (Dem. 
54),  7:o\>ripia  occurs  twice,  §9.  44,  in  neither  case  with  strong 
emphasis ;  Tzauoupyuq  ib.  44  is  quite  indirect. 


Deictic  Expressions. 

Of  deictic  words  and  1  :  ises,which  are  frequent  in  both  orators, 
little  need  be  said  ;  their  proportion  seems  to  be  highest  in 
Demu-Uic..!.-,  uvuiL  in  Isaeus,  and  to  vary  most  in  the  different 
speeches  of  Lysias.  The  ratio  of  roho-j  to  ^tev  o5y  is  much  higher 
in  Demosthenes  than  in  his  two  predecessors,  the  figures  being  : 


Lys. 

Isae. 

Dcm. 

rot'vyv 

121  =.6 

77  —..66 

i8o  =  .83 

juev  um 

80  =.4 

40  =  .34 

36  — .17 

'The  remarks  of  lAoy,  Plaidoyers  </'/j/if  VIII,  do  not  tell  against  this 
view.  It  is  true  that  Isaeus  does  not  '•  make  little  fishes  talk  like  whales  "; 
but  the  subtle  reflection  of  another's  character  in  his  own  style,  the  high 
dramatic  perfection  of  ij-donoda  achieved  by  Demosthenes  and  by  Lysias, 
were  beyond  his  reach. 


27 


Apostrophe. 


rr.n: 


nr   *  iu 


Lysias  uses  apostrophe  in  a  few  orations  \\  : 
10.  8-10.  12-14.  16.  17.  18,   13.  48.  58-9.  61     ;>      7    }x\  -    K.  19 
also  26.  I,  where  the  mutilation  of  the    1    <    ii  k.  \t-  tit   piecst 

force  of  the  apostrophe  u:  nan  li  is  to  i  t  oiMixti;  liai  11 
the  first  examples  cited  from  10,  the  apostroplit  wi)  a  t  xu  n^ a'  y 
argumentative,  becomes  ironical  throiiil  tli  a  1  that  ua  aiiu^ 
ment  turns  on  a  hypothetical  instance  oi  ua  awaKi  t  w  tli  \\  1  a  n 
the  adversary  is  slyly  taunted  throughout,  in  7  2  22  tia  f!-iirt 
is  argumentative  and  expostulatory,  as  n  I  >t  a  .  ^^.  ad  w  ili  He 
same  justification.  Thai  Lysias  should  h a  r  n  ( d  -c  raia  v  a 
form  of  speech,  the  capabilities  of  wh''  h   ;a    -     wa      una  i>i<H)n 


may  doubtless  be  exn'a'nad  inlar.j    nar-   ntai^  ma  (xr  nIn^Ianl  as 
attending  each  partunaa     oration;  but   n  aa-t    dsi    he  iaiia     n 
mind  that  the  apostrophe  is  essentially  and  pre  aaiiK  luh  ai:^ie- 
sive,  while  persuasiveness  is  tin'  d^aiaaini  pa  ^  ;t\   ai  die  pisaa-na 
eloquence  of  Lysias.     Isaeus  einplu\b  iii  s  ti^uc     r  v    n  !     a    o: 
his  twelve  speeches.    T^r  long  aposrrophic  en  ann.  ana  n   n  ^,4;   7 
recalls  some  passages  in  Dem.  36  and    is      nt     -   .  rt  -in  a    }   a  ^^ 
satisfactory  because  carried  to  the  end  01  tie  >n'     da   i-tt.Ki     n 
being  relieved  by  a  final  address  to  the  jnn-e-       la     hap    iiiel 
turn  in  6.  54  is  quite  DeniUiihenic  :  and  the  exi    -na  n    n  u  nn  da 
witness  (who  is  an  uncle  of  the  speaker)   in  9.   2^     xhi    is    ui 
effective  use  of  the  apostrophe  of  a  kdu'  not  to  be  p.  1     a  ac     in 
Demosthenes   or    Lysias.     The   remammg    pass.pr:.      ;     4>-U 
45-6.  48-9,  6.  25-6)  show  a  decided  weakness  of  treatnaent     p^  > 
trophe  and  interrogation  combined  are  nna!-    w  J   n    \  n  a a)^!h*  n*  > 
rarely  permits  either  to  become,  th(   \  eii.wic  ui  .np  na    i  n      1  h> 
is  comprehensible  enough  in  n  nriier  who've  strei  pd;    a^    n  aran- 
mentation,  and  who  evidently  possessed  nnl   a    a   a    a,-     ^^      ,5^; 
mand  of  tropes  than  a  natural  •  r    atistic  leaning   n  uaici  tropical 
expression;  but  it  helps  to  mark  the  fai       v    i         ^d      *     rt      n 
which  this  trained  advocate  stood  ase     apn   :  una   \\.v      ni  tr\ 
craftsman  who  preceded,  or  with  the  creat  statesman  u:;  neda  wed. 

him. 

Intfrrp  (ration. 

Interrogation  occurs  in  ivn»^t  of  the  h\-  an  c  oration-  nc n  n  5, 
17,  23,  28)  and  abounds  in  the  Isaean  ;  hut  n  u\  a  :  \a  .:er  !oi  n;^, 
the  challenge  and  the  suggestion,  are  inn<  pn  nt  \^nh  itii  wrncr-, 
Lysias  has  two  examples  of  each  in  u\       ;h  >  cia-     la     inddupe 


28 


in  4.  5.  19,  the  suggestion  in  13.  20.  64.  These  turns  of  speech 
have  an  abrupt  resilient  quality  that  does  not  perfectly  accord 
with  the  continuous,  easy  flow  of  his  style  ;  and  we  may  account 
in  1'k"  manner  for  the  fact  that  the  rhetorical  answer,  which  he 
empioys  rather  more  frequently,  exhibits  only  in  two  instances 
til  >  \  ■  letic  form  preferred  by  Demosthenes;  so  13.  74,  31.  28; 
u  III  yap  3.  36,  4.  ;  19,  26.  7;  with  aUd  4.  5,  19.  38-9.  The 
t  iliure  of  Isaeus  to  employ  the  challenge  (found  only  in  5.  43) 
1:1  i\  lie  ascribed  to  the  unimaginative  and  essentially  ar^umenta- 
t:\t:  :  rurt  u^' his  oratory,  which  does  not  easily  rise  to  dramatic 
t  ii'  >  t  !>  more  surprising  to  find  the  suggestive  question  only 
in  fori!  .!  t  ,  hes  (5.  13,  6.  36.  63,  8.  9,  11.  11.  32.  34).  No  doubt, 
liiL  \ci}  \  u.jiijss  of  this  figure  prevented  him  from  using  it 
ni  )re  hvishly ;  his  close,  coherent  style  holds,  but  does  not  arrest, 
the  attention.  Of  the  rhetorical  answer,  on  the  other  hand, 
which  is  simply  a  form  of  emphasis,  Isaeus  furnishes  not  a  few 
t  X  inples,  usually  in  asyndeton  (i.  29,  2.  22.  39,  3.  25.  34.  37.  39. 
4.  4^.  ^i.  66,  7.  32.  8.  II.  28,  9.  31,  10.  17,  II.  12.  19.  26);  it  is 
c  i!  HIS  to  observe  how  many  of  these  occur  in  Or.  3  and  with 
wiiat  Mmilarity  of  phrasing  ;  thus  §25.  39.  49  >a£  fid  Jia,  ei  ^v 
dATjt'^s^  TO   Tzpdyfia  ;   §48  ^ij  Jt"  ei  y/v  akr^Hr^  ;   §34,  r.oku  ye  fidXiffz*  av,  ei 

Irony. 

Irony  is  not  a  habit  with  Isaeus;  the  sharp  utterances  in  5.  40 
(ttjv  obffiav^  i<p'  r  vuv  i-iri  kaiirpoq^  dkko7p{a>)  and  II.  4  (iTTstdrj  deivdq 
el  diafSdkkztv  xai  rou^  vofiouq  dtuffrpiipet'^)  are  isolated  instances  of  a 
ti.iAy  vigorous  use  of  this  figure.     A  few  fainter  touches  occur  in 

2.  21  (too  <pd<Txo>To^  £U  (ppovelv)^  3.  29  ((^oxBl  av  u/i'tv  x.  r.  t.),  ib.  70 
i^uj  ya^^i)  ;  in  5.  I  'h'  repetition  of  the  proper  name  conveys  not 
sarca-ii:    ' -*  :    ;  i  I  vsias,  with  his  lively,  flexible  intel- 

i  \  ti  4er  command  of  ironical  expression  ;  but  the  Lysi- 
\    -  ntMiRras  constant  as  the  Demosthenic,  nor  has  it 
r- 1  A  ('i<^h<^.     Uiic  .speech  indeed  (10,  xard  SeojiurjtTrou  d) 

vci:  a   11  -^  I  irnnc^hntit  in  this  spirit;  the  defendant  had 
I    I       -ed  of  cowardice  in  battle,  and  around  this  charge 
ik   :  I    i^-   V    ;  er  insinuation  ;  especially  neat  are  the 

t  si  'isfxekirrjxa^ — kiyeiv  ;  k^y^pxet — rijv  dcrizida)^  §22  {auTo(; 
Sh  rrcuffaq  tyjv  dffntda),  §23  {dkV  oTi  aTzo^e^krjxux;  rd  onka).  The 
\v  litis  cpaukov  yap — r^youjiT}'/  in  §2  have  an  ingenious  doubleness 


anic  i: 

f  4 1 1  I : 


th 


I  i-i 


29 


of  meaning ;  they  may  signify  either  the  contemptible  nature  of 
such  an  imputation  or  the  slight  value  to  be  set  on  sucli   <:  i  it  as 

that  of  the  father  of  Theomnestus,  and  liie   atn  i  misi   1-  i  rcii^lu 

out  by  the  praise  of  1I1*'  -o-ak'-i'^  <'\vn  li'Aivr  m  4;  <■    -<-'  -'/'.ob 

d^ioo).     At  Other   iiusnie-nis   tiit   •  iiara(:tt  r    ailiibuitru    to   Tiieunv 

n-'-n:^    >iirs  the  aa-  use!'   inio  frank    ;nii4:naia»n    .^4-14,   2S-Q)  ; 

just   ao    Liir    l"Il-    •_>!    barcaSUC    r:'>i':o>U/^    :il    UI    (ohro^   ^£    fioi    /;,./;: 

X.  T.  £.).  and  in  the  explanation  ^i  'lit:  a/i^ai  !)h^a^t-oaa4\■  ^\(\  ly, 
T*^,  \Mr'''^  a:ni  taiat  ^n  :ij(i,4naii!  -\]]n-vA)r'iy  in  ?;2o  'o:'>/^y:': — 
drjkcu(T£t  di)  .^\:i\  ::;  -■;'  iv  auzu<;  d^:ajfTeL£)^)  ;  hui  llitt  genera]  iin- 
4:''--.-n  is  on--  ■-  a-aaa  iia->:ha,-\-' ai-nC:-s,  and  we  !t^f:a  ih.it  the 
t;  a:i>  under  which  riif-na:iic-tii>  max-  liaM;  winc^ed  nnis!  ii<ive 
piovoked  laughter  Ir.a:;  liie  nuii;*/-.  TIk:  [mimu^^x  in  J:26  "//-•.- 
(favra  xaxux;  ret  Tzpnar^xu-^ra)  \>  X'jrv  iiCat  in  il:-^  t)revit\'  and  >hsAvs  a 
ch  ira,.-tt  r'-tic  li^h*ae-.s  <>i  n.aicii  :  r!.  7,  24  i-'^  /'/^ — /-/o-- /./-,.  ., 
12,  27  {00  yap — ikdfi^avo'/) ,  42.  22  (ypd/i/iara — a-  //a  /-(hi.  In 
12.  7  (dTzoxTtvvuvat — iTzoionvTiA)  tiia  e<  a;,  laata  ai  k)\  aieas.  m  12.  86 
(ijSoukofjLrjv — dTTo^Aova?^  the  la  aiti  a>l.  v  a,ad>  an  aa  ana  iia\'or  ;  a)  30. 
17  the  brief  apnstrr4hia  .la 
sar    a  tic  color  a ^    a, 


r.t])ai 


tiiia:   to  tnc   laaaca  an 


V    a  I 


aMr^^a"    anc 


1,     i  a  '.  / 1  V 


t)i  a^aius 


are  the  brief  sneers    a   24.  3  (re  zobrou  dwiaiu)^  il).  21  \rwv  oaviux; 

TouTw  (faukw>\  ib.  27  (rtZiv  dfioiiov  auTw)  aiui  ihe  san  irins  ui  14  44 
(?v'  etdr^re  x.  r.  f.),  30.  7  (tuutujv — kotdopoufTiv'),  i  nt!  e  .^  .1  cina>  Ur^ 
obscurity   in    12    63  (xatToc  <T<p6dp*   av  x.  r.  i,)  :   and    th;^,    hke   llie 

extreme  brevity  of  the  ijnp]''aidon  ila  4  ^wheia-  tlie  one  wa.rrl 
fitrnixoiq  invoK'--  :  ae  idea  of  tln^  ^a:eztais  <ind  ?he  \via)n4S  iiom-  10 
them  by  ia.ia  :!aaaa>/.  ia  akai  ta>  .u;  aliusive  tenotaiey  wiiadi 
appear-,  apaii  li uin  ir<an}4  ni  a.aae  L)-bian>c  pas^a^es.  as  9,  5 
(^kiyovrei; — hdr)iioir[)^  10.  24  (rt'c  av  oux  ikerj^ete  J'nun/rtou):  anid  S(t  thie 
indirectness  of  t6.  19  (jtokku} — eipyaaixivoC)  is  [»  te  (  onirasied  \\  aili 


of  Dem.  ;~ 

aore  fiaakiv 


t.a  a 


the  distiivta' 
mad  ■.  a  >  4  \'%  ' 
doubt,  h,\  -   a 
inclination  lo  rely  t  a  i  a 
fart  tlvU  lie  train'^d  h  a^aei; 
small  circle  o!   tOaar^a  -    sa' 
aoout  him,  wiiile  the  in      a  a 
suggests  the  large  I  aaa  ra  a 


2  a:' 


^vnere  tnc  -ijeaKers  are 


as 


,sr  ota';M)iau  uiaauvantaees.     ^.no 


.. .,  .a,, 

i  a  '  '••  i  i 


and'.a"ai. .il  ai  :   hill    this    very 

'\n\\  .af  111^  haaraa's  reca'is  the 

nut  tur  Uie  puldic,  Jait  lar  a 


c     \ 


\\  I  a, :  i  a 

a-  F;al.>:■^  /'/iiu^driis  sncnvs  aatiieiaa.l 
clearra;ss  ni  Js.ttaia  and  Denna^thenas 

Ua.  1  .aasa:aae('t  liii:  aiw  c.a  air: ->.    it 


is  in  part  th.:3  divergence  m  liieu'  eaii}'  suiiuundai4^  that  exijiaaiS 
for  us   the   difference  between  the  irony  of  ].\>a5a  aiai    ilait   ul 


30 


tio;..      1, 
here  Mi 
into  CO; 

i  1 ;  --     :>'.  >\\ 
u-:t;i   w]] 


Demosthenes  ;  the  former  was  accustomed  to  amuse  and  delight 
applauding  friends  by  easy  insinuating  dexterities  of  speech ;  for 
the  latter,  reared  in  an  atmosphere  of  combat,  the  most  finished 
incrnncp  was  never  without  a  certain  grim  earnestness  of  inten- 
!irse,  charactr  must  also  be  t  >k  n  into  account,  and 
lement  of  vVr>r(>£ca,  as  exhibited  i;  <  ii  orator,  comes 
:  Kven  when  he  wrote  for  others  to  speak,  the 

:  '  Umiosthenes  u^^  necessarily  ironical,  lofty,  incisive; 
: :  ;  n  ture  absorbed  and  transmuted  the  personality 
ii  :  iiad  to  become  identified.  Lysias  exhibits  greater 
d  V  !  -  ties  ot  tone  a  '  i*  •  :ie;  like  irony,  other  qualities,  found 
in  one  <  r a  on,  are  absent  from  another,  and  sometimes  his  com- 
ro-  t  !.  H  rise  above  mediocrity  by  talent  only,  not  by  force  of 
ciiaracici  ,  the  plasticity  of  his  nature  expressed  itself  in  his  cling- 
:-  .  <n'le,  that  rarest  of  styles,  which,  like  an  elastic  and  trans- 
p.irei::  aiV;  reveals  indifferently  the  native  features,  or  the 
grimaces,  ol  all  who  borrow  it,  from  the  pensioner  to  the  patriot. 

Repetition. 

In  dealing  with  repetition  in  Isaeus  and  Lysias  it  is  necessary 
to  distinguish  the  rhetorical  figure  from  a  mere  reiteration  without 
rhetorical  effect.  This  last  is,  as  Blass  observes  (II  502),  a 
tendt:.  \  wth  the  former  orator;  cf.  6.  50,  where  the  words  tl(i\ 
yvrjfftot  are  twice  repeated  with  a  certain  awkwardness  of  distinct- 
ness. In  Lysias  this  apparently  artless  reiteration  appears  a  part 
of  that  studied  simplicity  on  which  Dionysius  remarks  (de  Lys.  8)  ; 
so  in  I.  :-  (rravra  1100 — tiro^jV/c).  In  a  Comparison  intended  to 
show  the  artistic  use  of  ,  figure  in  the  three  orators  it  seems 
reasonable  to  set  aside  not  only  such  cases,  but  also  those  in  which 
a  word  used  in  anaphora  is  inevitable  and  therefore  unemphatic,  as 
is  the  c  -  \"'h  ' Vra,  Dem.  36.  38,  and  av,  Dem.  37.  36.  37,  and  to 
confine  ourselves  to  the  most  regular  or  most  emphatic  forms.  Of 
ti  Lysias  has  four:  anaphora  with  ,uev — 5^  (7.  41,  10.  27,  12.  19. 

_      ;         ;;         8.  94,   13.    i.  44,    16.  8,    18.  3,    I9.  Q.  62,  21.   25,    23.     Il), 

asyndetic  anaphora  (3.  46,  14.  6),  epanadiplosis  (13.  93,31.  22), 
xuxhtq  (4,  16).  Isaeus  exhibits  a  greater  variety;  anaphora  with 
fih — di  (5.  9.  20,  6.  4  ;  1 1.  9.  10).  asyndetic  anaphora  (8.  14,  11.  6. 
35),  epanadiplosis  (11.  35  bis),  (tu/ittAoxij  (5.  25,  6.  53),  x(>x/o^  (5.  46), 
anastrophe  (8.  17).  The  number  of  occurrences  and  proportion 
per  Feubner  page  for  the  three  orators  are  : 


\  "^ 


anaphora  with  /xiv — di 

asyndetic  anaphora: 

epanadiplosis: 

ffOfinXuxTJ  : 

xbxXo^ : 

anastrophe : 

antistrophe: 


31 

Lys. 
16 

2 
2 


Isae. 

5 

3 
2 

2 

I 


Dem. 
12 

6 

7 

3 
I 

4 

2 


2 1  z=  .  I  1 4 


lOI 


n'  -h"  Lysianic  instances  four  nni:^  h,^  :ni;i;  \i^  flu-  flr^t  <:'as>, 
the  weakest  and  least  rla  ;■  a  a/al  >  a  ..:i  ;  and  :t  i^  la  a:ceaha;  tiaa  ai 
his  two  cases  of  epanadiplosis  lia,-  laaaial  >\^,^^>\\v><  *a  iha  iiiiine 
is  softened  bv  lac  .v.a;^  ...icrval  at  wh:^  a  die  wnru  ;-  icpeaitai  — 
an  effect  found  also  in  §13  01  ihe  -V'-ivh  aijaia-t  i  dnoia  w  lac  h 
appro. i. di.  s  nearer  to  tiu-  l.\-<ianic  >ia:r  uaa;  .ia\-  utder  lUaia=>- 
thenic  oration  except  d^a  .i-aia.ra  Callicles.  And  a  ntanc-thciK  > 
uses  stron-<"  :>■a•l:>.a^  taaa  d^  c-  I.v-m^  ha  «anp".^\-s  U\*:>e 
sLioiig  forms  u.ui  niuic  \^aia_i)  aiiu  loicc  ilaai  a<;r-  1-ataia.  n.^ 
autiTzkox-q  \s  more  ma^s've;  his  asyndetic  aaapasaai  ib  caiaa  (aaa- 
bined  with  interrogaiion  ;  and  his  haaiia:?  ^  s*  a  uaiu  s  auaatd 
dv  .X  -aarmth  of  feelini^  which  lerd-  -laaUT  wraidit  ti^  it;|)ea:ta  a. 
This  is  noticeably  the  case  in  a^  a  •  uiuaa  xvw  t  nu  ni  ](>>  - 
marks  the  rise  of  passi'  a  .aai  isfolh>wrtJ  a\'  a  wa.nckaau,  ^ara^  u* 
short  asyndetic  clauses,  ivvo  ui  w  aich,  ao^.r;-'  OErrrn-t  and    /^r^'Ow 

Mt  aa.;<  aaaa  die 


I  f  *  '  ^.  I  '  t 


It  a  van  i:it 


r 


i       i~.  T-\  1 


onananiDif  i> 


t  a  '    i  o ''  ' ;- i'    \ ' 


y><  '^^ :,:  o !  a  i  '-^  r  c 


ar 


,  4. .  t  i  '■  '  i 


aiai 


.  r.„  t 


dvTt^oku)^  re' 

habitual  ca;*-  a  d:  aldah  1  n  ; 

alike  the  naive  iteaa     a 

throws  into  relief  the  distinc 

they  acquire  artistic  finish  and  bi^niiu n   a    t!<  m   da  a    -<  n  a^.  no 

!•--  ?han  from  their  form.     I^  '■^  diffindi  to  atudaa'-  m  dy-a.>  anv 

1  .   a  of  artistic  pa-ver;  and  .ni  aA.aaph/  .  a  a:^\a-a,!taa:  aaai|dKa\i  n*)t 

cited  above  (32.  16)  shoua^    ia  a» 

the  expression  of  feeling.     Ida   1 

integral  part  of  the  oration  ni  \ 

rather  professes  to  be  quoted     ' 

grieved  and  angrv  vv<ar 

count  it  as  an  exaaaa)  a  i 

orator  could  do,  and,  by  its  posna  in  what 

from  doing.     The  high  fervor  and    a.ia  .1  ,.  ^ 


a  H 


\  aaa-   lor 


xalajaaail  ataittaaa.;  >  la'a  an 
■11  a  aaaiii-  ■  a  a-  <nn  ^led.  -a' 
\  1  la.'  axcaa-  i  a* It  lanar-  ol  a 
.  :  </.,i-'  ai  I  h.i\'a  n^a  ahosan  tr^ 


t  a  )a 


«    ,  =  1 1 


ahawv^  \\  hell   th 


aiiu.ad.-  ratr;ant-d 
.alch  wa.A.,  d  I.d,  11  ca- - 


32 


thenes  brought  upon  the  tribune  Lysias  found  inappropriate,  save 
when  excused  by  the  device  of  dramatization. 

Asyndeton. 

To  discuss  at  length  the  employment  of  asyndeton  in  the  three 
orators  u  Kiid  je  too  large  a  task  for  the  limits  of  this  paper;  a 
K  V     j^^civations  will  serve  to  indicate  the  development,  extensive 

this  construction  received  at  the  hands  of 


;ntf^n-;\'- 


\\ 


u;,-4 


h 


^  C 1 1 1  i » ■>  t ! ; '  • : 

a   >!t,'  id\-  :; 

1  C  '  ( '  ■  i  ^'  * 

C3 

I, v..    -r^r 

—     •■-,       ~        r 

))rtional  number  of  occurrences  we  find 
:     ough  Isaeus  i*.  Demosthenes, 


.    «    ^5  .  I  i 


n: 
1 


1 J 


.  !  '■  I 


r  ub.  p.      Isae.  142  z:z  i.o      Dem.  302=:  1  : 

igular  progression  appears  in  the  introduction 

testimony     u--  re  asyndeton  in  the  summons  to 

ess  gives  a;        lect  of  sharpness  and  eagerness. 

I  such  command       lie  instances  of  asyndeton, 

:  i:.<  ~L  i_'  the  whole,  are: 


^K.Jl 


Lys.  65:  4izr  o6       Isae.  83  :  iozz:.i2      Dem.  129:  31  =  .24 

1 1  uie  use  of  the  weightiest  form  of  asyndeton,  the  cumulative, 
I  >e  n osthenes  exhibits  a  much  greater  advance  on  his  prede- 
cessors : 

Lys.  4  =:.  02  per  Teub.  p.       Isae.  12  =  .08      Dem.  43  =  .2 

De:  I  '-  1  •  -,  employs  asyndeton  freely  in  emotional  passages. 
Especially  cliaracteristic  are  the  foiLw.ng  abrupt  utterances: 
«^r<^>  /'£  28.  6,  oux  eta  /ii(Tf%uv  28.  7';  uu  Ttporepoy  31.  12;  6pa<; 
Tov  A,  36.  50;  w  j^iXziffr'  ib.  52;  oux  rjdixoo  ib.  54;  Sp^'^wq  /  uj  11, 
;~  6;  It.'  ixghoiq  38.  27;  <nda  xdycu  3g.  12;  Tobaat  jxiv  and  oude\q 
d-ekav^^et  ib.  34  ;  7:o>rjpd<;  w.  a.  'A.  45.  80.  Somewhat  similar  are,  in 
Isaeus,  the  brusque  ipwrrj^io  tre  11.  5,  oux  a^:ov  ib.  47  ;  but  in  gen- 
eral this  orator  uses  asyndeton  chiefly  for  the  sake  of  emphasis. 
Characteristically  Lysianic  is  its  use  in  transitions  or  in  a  simple 
continuation  of  the  narrative  or  argument;  so  iaiwr.wv  iyw  i.  14; 

wtiokoyet   zauza   TZotsTv   ib.  22;    eyio/  uv  avc«Tov  4.  17  ;    :ToUd<;  av  7.  14 

(where  it  is  unnecessary  to  assume  a  lacuna,  as  is  done  by  Scheibe 

^The  introductory  clause  preceding  distinguishes  this  passage  from  the 
similar  one  in  38.  23,  which  seemed  to  suggest  that  that  oration  had  not 
been  carefully  worked  out.  An  asyndetic  transition  from  one  topic  to 
another  is  not  characteristic  of  the  finished  work  of  Demosthenes. 


.    •  33 

and  by  some  other  critics);  w  //£v  rpur.u)  9.  13;  oux  lyw  18.  24: 
Tzpoffi'ji^oui^i  rov  votjv  30.  23;  ratXu  uv  elr)  32.  II.  Such  instances  are 
rare  in  Demosthenes:  ouzoq  eXa^e  41.  3;  k'-^tvo.ixdffzoxy  54.  3;  -6XX^ 
dv  eiTtelv  ib.  44  (at  the  beginning  of  a  brief  epilogue;  of.  I  ^  ?.  :^t. 
34);  -zokXd  douXtxd  57.  45;  and  so  Isaeus  10   22  -ovzo  p-ev  o]d'  ozt. 

The  tendency  of  Demosthenes  to  tii 
tion  with  warmth  of  tone  is  iai   :     i   •iid. 


).r-\-   a: 


IliU- 


-fa I :vt  .V 


1  „\'>: 


rare  use  of  it  in  the  quiet  beginn  112  ^^f  -  i;  urata  t 
is  introduced  by  an  asyndetic  s  nit  laa     1 
12.4,   17.2,   32.4),  in  Demostlua-   *w 
secondary  narrative  it  occurs  twice  in  I  ^ 

in  Demosthenes  (38.  12.  -7.  ;  I-  -  is  1 
live  6.  19,  where  tw?^  a^yndeiic  ^<  i^'t  r  '  s 
10.  4  the  0Lrjrf(T'.q  IS  mtroduced  ^x-:h  yap^ . 


.i:  (''. 


'i  I  'i ' 


t,    i!  M-      ♦ 


lie? 

[•->■  4, 

^        ^ 

m     a 

r,  z^  . 

t  \sa(:e 

^-\] 


t  a  ( •  1 1 


fi  J  i    a: 


Dt 


J    -  .  !    ( 


w 


If    , 


e 


v5) 


\\  11! 


at: 


\\' 


2^11   is  m  c\ 
II   a   aommt 

A. 


Dem.  28. 


detic  continuation,  vuzoq  k'Xafie  ;  this  '-  t 
Noteworthy  is  tht  labile  asya  :   a  a     a; 
introduction  with  yap:  contrasi  i  2  ;      5^ 
«uv  is  placed  between  aa   :\\     abyi.aeia. 

A  not  uncommon  ube  la  tn's  rnrstii 
duced  by  a  demonstrath^    \2  <  ii 

explanation  or  res  aapaDi  of  what  has  just  prececu^ 
refer  here  to  the  occurrv  ac  e  of  such  ca^;  -  >at( a  acu  aniaair-  (  r  a  >a 
mony,  which  is  in  general  c  la   u:  lac  \\c   an^t  !<aair  of  asynLa  a  11, 
though  n^  possible  vigor  ui  mass  mav   ae  >ati 
11-13.     \\     ere  these  clauses  break  the    i'  a\  ni 
have  usually,  in  Demosthenes,  1  a  trmth  ol  toiu  \\  1     a  2>  .--b'-'iivn 
to  be  felt  in  the  other  orators.     Cf. 

L>;=.  I.  2.  17,  3.  13,  4.  II.  16,  9.  ;,  i^,.  .(>.  31.60.71.79.  81,  23.  9, 
26.  20,  32.  21  ;  with  warmth  10.  28,  12.  20.  84,  13.  47. 

Isae.  I.  10,  2.  20.  21,  3.  67,  5.  10,  7.  9.  16.  28.  45  to,  8.  24,  II.  3. 
42.  43;  with  warmth  2.  23.37,  3.  23  dis,  5.  11,  7.  21.  23. 

Dem.  27.9,  29.  10,  30.  6.  14,  37.  36,  55.  25 ;  with  warmth  27.  25. 
31,  30.  8.  24  dis.  38,  37.  41,  45.  2,  57.  65. 

>  Isae.  6.  19  and  7.  5  are  not  to  be  regarded  as  instances  of  cumulative 
asyndeton;  this  term  is  meant  to  include  only  those  cases  in  which  ae 
asyndetic  clauses  are  intimately  connected,  embodying  essentially  one  idea 
and  conveying  an  impression  of  rapidity.  So  in  Dem.  28.  20  wv  i  avt  n  a 
one  instance,  but  four,  of  cumulative  asyndeton  :  cuoaz'  eAer/aare,  iKETevo) 
dvTi^o?.(j,  Trpbc—vfilv,  ovTug—pe.  The  pauM-^  after  ijASTjoav,  7re<pEvyafiev,  vfilv 
are  strongly  felt;  they  represent  the  catch  in  the  breath,  the  breaking  of 
the  voice  between  these  rapid  utterances  of  passion. 


34  '     . 

The  number  of  instances  in  each  class  is  therefore  : 

Lys.  15  :  4,  Isae.  14  :  7,  Dem.  6  :  9. 

It  appears  then  that  this  kind  of  asyndeton  is  used  more  fre- 
quently by  the  two  earlier  orators  than  by  Demosthenes,  and  that 
the  latter  oftener  infuses  into  it  a  tone  of  strong  feeling. 

Of  the  prooemium  in  Lysias  and  Isaeus  there  is  nothing  to  be 
said,  save  that  neither  orator  anywhere  exhibits  that  intense  cul- 
tivation and  exquisite  finish  of  this  part  of  the  speech  which  were 
found  in  some  orations  of  Demosthenes. 


III. — Examination  of  Suspected  Speeches. 

The  fact  that  this  paper  originated  in  a  study*  of  Or.  34  led 
naturally  to  an  examination  of  the  other  speeches  dealing  with 
questions  of  marine  insurance;  to  these  I  have  added  Orr.  40  and 
46  on  account  of  their  close  connection  with  39  and  45,  respect- 
ively. 

Or.  32. — Schafer  finds  the  speech  against  Zenothemis  Demos- 
thenic neither  in  composition  nor  in  tone ;  Blass  rejects  it  only 
for  faults  in  method  and  argument.  One  of  these  lies  in  the  fact 
that  the  demurrer  is  argued  out  in  the  prooemium  ;  what  has  been 
said  above  concerning  Orr.  36  and  37  shows  that  this  anticipation  . 
is  not  Demosthenean.  As  the  prooemium  is  faulty  in  substance, 
so  in  form  it  displays  no  delicacy  of  finish  ;  and  the  concluding 
words  have  a  tone  not  to  be  paralleled  from  Demosthenes.  The 
speaker,  after  making  the  customary  appeal  for  a  fair  hearing, 
says :  axoixr^fff^e  yap  (h^^pior.no  roX/iav  xai  7:o>r^p{aw  ou  rijv  ru^uuffav^ 
av-Ksp  iyct)  ra  r.zr.paytiiv  anroj  Tzpd^  orid<;  7:o?jAxt^  etTter^  Sw^r^'f^a). 
olfiai  di.  The  power  of  demonstration  is  always  put  by  Demos- 
thenes as  a  thing  to  be  attempted  {-zetpdnoiiai  dtddaxeiv  27.  3,  30.  5, 
etTze'iv  rr.  31.  3,  36.  3.  45.  2,  r.  osl^ai  57.  i)  and  he  expresses  confi- 
dence only  in  the  convincing  force  of  facts  (29.  i  ix  dk  toutwv 
ol/iai — cuy^wfTTou  E(T£(jHat  ;  ib.  5  twrwq  iieydlotq — iXiy^(n(; — w<t»*/' — 
erVctri^tt:  ;  so  30.  5  ;  36.  3  cc  auzcuu  rwv  TTSTTpayfiiviuv  etffetn^e  ;  SO  55.  3; 
54.2  (Tuyy^cu/iTjv  i^er  eo  «](5'  on — irreiddv — dxouffrjre^]  nowhere  does 
he  permit  himself,  or  his  client,  such  a  touch  of  brusque  arrogance 
as  that  which  here  ofiends  good  taste  and  strikes  an  inartistic  note. 

There  is  a  fair  proportion  of  deictic  expressions  (2.  6);  the  effec- 
tive employment  of  the  apostrophe  in  §28-30  recalls  Dem.  37.  57  ; 

*  Published  in  the  Johns  Hopkins  University  Circular,  No.  109,  Feb.  1S94. 


35 

the  denunciatory  words  Tro^rjpia  (§2.  3)  and  dvatSeta  (§9)  are  used 
with  directness.     Among  other  forms  of  interrogation  the  sugges- 
tion occurs  once  (§10),  the  challenge  once  (§27);  but  the  rhetorical 
answer,  in  the  vigorous  form  which  sways  opinion,  is  not  found. 
The  total  absence  of  repetition  seems  significant;  still  more  so  the 
frequency  of  asyndeton  in  toneless  passages.     In  §28.  indeed,  this 
figure  is  employed  with  force  ;  but  there  are  nine  examples  (§1.  10 
e(Tz.  ipy.  II  bis.  14.  17  tc  avz.  18  bis.  26)  of  those  asyndetic  contin- 
uations which  are  altogether  infrequent  with  Demosthenes.    In  §4 
and  §31  the  clause  in  asyndeton  stands  in  appositional  relation  to 
the  preceding,  as  in  Dem.  29.3;  but  the  short  asyndetic  sent^  ',  es 
which  break  the  direct  quotations  in  §15  are  as  unlike  Demos- 
thenes as  is  that  manner  of  narration  (cf  Hug,  cited  by  !•   .       IH 
438).     This  lavish  use  of  the  unemphatic  asyndeton  suggest:^  a 
study  of  Lysias  and  an  exaggeration  of  one  of  the  devices  by 
which   he   achieved    simplicity  and   avoided  the   appearance  of 
rhetorical  artifice;  and  the  faint  touches  of  irony  in  §12  and  §27 
might  be  copied  from  Lys.  32.  22.    Neither  in  those  two  passages 
nor  in  §24  (roh  ffoifoo)  do  we  find  anything  resembling  the  ironic 
power  of  Demosthenes ;  and  this  fact,  the  weakness  of  the  pro- 
oemium, the  lack  of  repetition,  and  the  dominant  quality  of  the 
asyndeton   seem  to  tell  with  conclusive  weight  against  the  genu- 
ineness of  the  speech,  although  at  some  points  its  style  approaches 
the  Demosthenic  type. 

Or.  33.— The  well-knit  and  lucid  speech  against  Apaturius  is 
held  together  by  an  abundance  of  deictic  words  and  phrases 
(3.  i),  but  exhibits  otherwise  none  of  the  features  which  serve  to 
mark  the  power  and  art  of  Demosthenes.  There  is  a  good  deal 
of  interrogation,  but  it  is  all  assertive  or  argumentative;  the  sug- 
gestion is  wanting,  and  the  challenging  tone  is  only  slightly  felt 
in  §23  and  §25 ;  there  is  no  rhetorical  answer.  The  denunciatory 
phrase  dq  ruhro  d^atdsiac;  directed  at  the  adversary  in  §22,  at  his 
confederate  in  §19,  lacks  sharp  utterance,  as,  indeed,  the  qualities 
of  sharpness  and  strenuousness  are  generally  wanting  in  this  pleas- 
antly smooth  and  persuasive  composition.  The  single  instance 
of  repetition  lies  in  the  sortof  antistrophe  at  the  close— a  position 
which  this  figure  nowhere  has  in  any  Demosthenean  oration.  Of 
irony  in  the  Demosthenic  sense  there  is  none,  and  only  an  isolated 
touch  of  energetic  reprobation  in  §37  (rd  pa(Tzu>  x.r.i.).  A-  i-  i-  n 
occurs  only  in  a  few  passages,  chiefly  with  weak  tone  :  aiici  ic^^i  - 


36 

mony  (§9.  16),  in  indistinct  apposition  (§32-3),  in  a  question  (§37), 
at  the  beginning  of  the  short  epilogue  (§38).  It  is  worth  while  to 
compare  Or.  55,  which  contains  only  seven  examples  of  asyndeton 
(§13  bis.  15.  24  bis.  25.  31),  by  far  the  smallest  number  to  be  found 
in  any  of  the  fourteen  speeches,  but  these  almost  wholly  in  warm 
or  emphatic  passages.  These  particulars  only  confirm  the  obser- 
\\i  ;.  of  Blass  (III  515),  that  we  miss  here  the  life  and  power  of 
Demosthenes  ;  and  in  the  prooemium  we  may  note,  not  only  the 
colorless  and  impersonal  character  on  which  Blass  remarks,  but 
also  the  strong  contrast  with  the  genuine  prooemia ;  their  tone  is 
always  intensely  personal,  save  in  Or.  57,  where  the  generaliza- 
tions are  justified  by  the  general  movement  of  which  Euxitheus 
finds  himself  unwillingly  a  part.  Of  the  delicate  workmanship, 
the  fine  threads  ot  suggestion  linking  this  part  to  the  whole,  such 
as  are  seen  in  the  maturer  speeches  of  Demosthenes,  there  is  here 
no  trace.  As  to  the  manner  of  introducing  the  demurrer  in  the 
prooemium  and  having  the  law  at  once  read,  this  is  at  any  rate 
more  smoothly  managed  than  the  similar  arrangement  in  Or.  38. 
But  that  speech,  with  all  its  imperfection,  has  the  high  artistic 
qualities  of  vividness  and  passion  ;  this,  which  in  its  uniform,  tame 
correctness,  has  all  the  necessary  and  none  of  the  superfluous 
virtues,  is  stamped  with  a  spiritual  tisrpiorrjq  possible  to  the  art  of 
Lysias,  but  not  to  the  fiery  temperament  of  Demosthenes. 

Or.  34. — The  speech  against  the  merchant  Phormio,  condemned 
in  brief  terms  alike  by  Schafer  and  Blass  as  not  of  Demosthenic 
type,  exhibits  only  characteristics  confirmatory  of  their  judgment. 
The  prooemium  is  lacking  as  well  in  finish  and  suggestiveness  as 
in  the  clearness  and  point  that  appear  even  in  the  lengthiest  and 
least  forcible  of  the  genuine  prooemia,  that  of  Or.  29;  the  grounds 
for  the  demurrer  are  urged  in  §4,  essential  portions  of  the  narra- 
tive are  briefly  recited  in  §2  and  §5,  and  as  a  result  of  this  antici- 
pation the  point  at  issue  is  loosely  and  difi^usely  stated  (§5).  A 
corresponding  looseness  in  the  construction  of  the  whole  is  marked 
by  the  very  small  number  of  deictic  expressions.  The  particles 
Toi>uv  and  m^v  oov  are  indeed  used  with  sufficient  frequency,  the 
former  eight,  the  latter  seven  times  ;  of  monitory  verbs  or  demon- 
stratives there  are  only  some  ten,  and  these  are  nowhere  used 
with  the  accumulation  characteristic  of  Demosthenes.  The  pro- 
portion, then,  is  about  1.7,  equal  to  that  of  the  passionate  deuter- 
qIootv  icrninst  Aphobus  which  stands  lowest  in  this  respect  among 


\ 


f 


37 

the  genuine  speeches.  But  Or.  34  is  not  at  all  passionate ;  the 
tone  is  argumentative  throughout,  and  for  argument  I  i  n  i n  *  -, 
as  we  have  seen,  employs  these  turns  of  pb  a  t  \  hh  .u-c  oiu  n 
in  mass.  In  consequence  of  this  wraknc 
which  are  very  slightly  marked,  in  §2j  r 
ouv;  in  the  former  pa^~  *.  :^  the  writer  ;i 
demarcation  from  1  n'l!  w  '  a.nnMit 
almost  an  absolute  sev  ci  aii^t  ui  i  i  «  ;  •  11 
occur;  the  suggestive  question  an  i  tlie    ii  . 


\l  V 


,l]\> 


i!  n  s 

\'  hy  oTjf  ]]]  ^su'-  \  V  fj-s:'^ 

'ft,  (i>  Wf  l\    no  ^rn^•^'e 

111    ire  l.iiUT   therr   ;s 

Rt.iK't ;: ,:  ;n  ii(>es  not 

H  nijc  iii'c  ahko  al  ^Miit. 


'  ne  \\  t'.iR 


anpoaj  >  ^40 


-  \i]v  A]\ivi\\]t  u\  aiui  uiihoiH   torce 
\n.;n  nc  ELxoTw^  (§5i)>  i-n'-'winy  n(;;t 


as  is  the  rhetorical  ansun 

firjSa/xujq  o)  a.  <5.).     ,\  o  nl    !    1 

(§2.  4.  16.  17.  50)  ;  even  tn 

on  a  statement  of  fart  hu:    -  i;  aw  a-sunM'ta)n 

effect  which  it  has  in  I  >op.i.  30.  37,  30   :5.  a:   ^7 

this  Demosthenes  (57.  33)  u^f^-  n  re  i  i a 

tion  is  made  by  Lysias  (conin-!  1  \- 

There  is  no  irony,  or  at  lea--    ;aa'   in-a.  ,1  ri  *  d   i)x  H.a^h  ni   >35  l^ 

very  faint  and  reside-   ;.ttia.  i     n   tin'  ;a.nt!<.^tn<i  tart-  than   :n  the 

colorless  eapras^ion  ;  a  Luiiipaiiiiuii  x^'ili  l.v^-  12.  ^-^f')  showh  hnw  a 


\'( 


t       T    t 


u  u 


V:  1  nkc  rase  to 
r  !-an;f  (i:st;nc- 
I  ■'"'" .   .'  f "' ,  26.  1 "  ' . 


pointed  n''.n!a"<-  r,f  plirn^e  ^^erves  t. 


!  ;nn  ^iUl    inn   iron\-  0}   con- 


n  no 


niiusnnn>s    «>t    uttniance. 


The 


4r^k;nu    ciS   llie   case  otiered 


w 


will 


lorn;  pa^^;tO'5;s, 


trast,  which  is    a  r         - 

absence  of  this  figun 

much   opportunity   for   its   n-r       inl    as   aposti()|)h( 

Demosthenes  is  often  ironiral  is  iitw  ^n  1  i  >\  nd 

§26-8  and  §30-3.  It  is  t--  la-obser\a(i  ihat  fiu-  nniin  ari^nnKnts 
are  brought  f\)rAa!d  d;  tia-(  i.;t--a-(-.  ni  the  Ur^^i  a-  whadi  apo<^ 
trophe  is  douha  fi  nn-a:.d,'.a?  wd:  a:tM  la -fanca^-  I  Jenaistht.nns 
is  not  accustomed  to  bur(d  n  ■■-r.v.-r  <•'  iht-f  i:\ad\-rinnrnswithany 
weight  of  argument,  and  tins  \,ir^v  enipa  vna/nt  oi  hrai]  ni  Rndi  a 
use  shows  misapplication  of  rhetorical  pas  v  n.  I  ia  :  ra  !  ndhesb 
to  the  judges  in  §32  and  §33  mic^ht  r  nnn  n  ^^  .1  Dam  36. 
51  and  45.  80.  82;  but  there  the  f)t  un  -  in  n  »  r  a^  t  wean 
s.vrnt  away  in  the  torrent  of  apostrophic  denunciation,  i 


'  (■'  c 


real  audience,  turns  to  it,  and  s^ 
of  passion  to  return  a^ain  to  his   a 

is  produced,  because  tae  i  inn    n 
adversa;v  ^     nly  fell    the  more 

turns  ot  1  >na--  la'  -a  -.  ^n.  ii  ;i-  u 


impelling  inflnc  1 


( t' 


U     '  1  • .  '  t  ■' 


<n  no  SU'  ii  ai"!  istac  a 


„nnnn  w 


tne 


n. 


to,  t  n*' 

i  a  a  a  a  >' 


Ida 


w.d  :  ll!o  slicnn,  sharp 
see  ni  i<\  20.  are  n<n  !r(>nn  but 
;~£!v«r7}c.  wlncd)   these  ddierent 


na  n;  oducta  is  iiei-iit^.  and  by  llie  manner  m  which  denun- 


38 

ciatory  words  are  employed.  Here  a  certain  indirectness  is 
apparent.  Thus  xaxonffyr^jm  (§29)  stands  in  an  appeal  (and  con- 
trast the  reinforcement  of  xay.oupfia  with  't/^'j  in  45.  39)  ;  adixr^jia 
(§7)  is  introduced  without  emphasis,  as  may  be  seen  by  compar- 
ison w  til  the  vigorous  use  oi  a(^ixoq  in  the  Demosthenean  passages 
cited  auuve  ;  r:(»r^p6:;  (§2o)  is,  so  to  speak,  quoted  as  a  finding  of  the 
court,  and  a'^ai(T'/o>ro)q  (§19)  has  only  a  general  application.  On 
the  other  hand,  as  the  final  word  before  the  formal  epilogue  we 
find  ^'^r^piiov^  a  harsh  epithet  not  used  by  Demosthenes,  at  least  in 
aiiy  private  oration;  this,  coming  in  at  the  last  like  a  forcible- 
feeble  splutter  of  wrath,  is  roughly  destructive  of  the  dignity  which 
should  belong  to  this  part  of  the  speech  and  which  is  always  to  be 
felt  in  the  close  of  a  Demosthenic  oration. 

Or.  35. — The  speech  against  Lacritus  contains  most  of  the 
features  which  I  have  taken  as  tests  of  Demosthenic  composition, 
and  some  of  these  do  not  altogether  lack  Demosthenic  tone. 
Thus,  in  interrogation  we  meet  with  one  example  of  the  sugges- 
tion (§22),  two  of  the  challenge  (§45.  49)  ;  the  short  apostrophic 
turns  in  §45.  46.  47.  49  have  much  the  air  of  those  noticed  in  the 
genuine  orations.  Asyndeton  is  freely  employed,  sometimes  with 
force,  though  the  cumulative  form,  found  in  all  of  the  fourteen 
speeches  excepting  31,  is  missing.  Of  repetition  we  have  epana- 
diplosis  in  §16  {obroffi — ovto^'),  where  the  punctuation  of  Bekker 
is,  I  think,  to  be  preferred  to  that  of  Dindorf  and  Blass ;  there  is 
no  pause,  but  a  quick  recovery  of  the  dropped  thread  of  speech. 
in  §54  (-">?  ofjx  ddixzinHz — tzcu^  oux  ddtxs'i)  a  curious  anacoluthic 
anaphora  is  to  be  noticed,  which  finds  parallels  in  Isae.  2.  42-3 

((5c«vov  To  Tzpdyiia — rcib^  oux  d>  d.  r,  r.),  ib.  43  (raDr'  i(TT\  rd  Troiouvra — 
r.  L  rd  Xu7zoT)>ra),  9*  1 5  (j^  '^^'"^  "^  u/iaj\>  ^avetJ]  rctrrov — ra)^  rooro:/ 
TTKTTo'^),  and  in  Lys.  12.  36  (ofu  i>uv  ^e^vov — oux  apa  xp^)j  but  not  in 
Demosthenes,  to  whom  anacoluthon  seems  to  have  been  in  general 
repugnant.  The  style  of  Isaeus  is  also  recalled  by  the  inartistic 
repetition  o(  yiypci-rrai  zdbra  (§19.  22.  25),''i'V)jvaC^  7:api)(itv  wdr.atpa 
(§37.  39),  dei^^q  ehai  (§41).  The  proportion  of  deictic  expressions 
(2.08  per  page)  is  lower  than  in  Or.  39,  which  does  not  deal  with 
legal  points,  and  which  moreover,  in  the  passionate  suppositions 
that  take  the  place  of  argument,  supplies  in  some  degree  the  want 
of  ordinary  transitional  formulas  by  such  interjectional  substitutes 
as  ehv  (§13.  18.  30),  xakd):;  (§15).  Further  the  particles  rohov  and 
/lev  o5v  appear  rarely,  the  second  three  times  (§3.  21.  55),  the  first, 


A> 


>,. 


h  r-.v 


]  i  i>- 


u 


'■lit  are  mere 

IDr    i'VAl,    .:Ild 
« 'I 


u  ■■  f  ■*  1 


i:e 


l./L'U  ii<J  :~- 


^  \ 


39 

which  is  by  far  the  favorite  with  Demosthenes,  only  oncf 

rhetorical  answer  occurs  (§26),  not  h(  u      -r  in  tlie  'mm    j 

thenic  form  of  curt  affirmation  or  denial,  but  over! 

denunciation.     This  overloading  is  obsf  jx.e'i     ui    1  l  !;(  it   n  a 

tone  which  Blass  calls  wiizelnd,  bni  wiiich  b( e  !r;>  lu  iiic  latiiti  lu 

denote    unbridled  indignation;    the  openir-    u(  ids  (oo^ev  zarvov 

X.  r.  f.)  have  no  coloring  of  ridicule  or  bi;irr  m 

vehement  abuse,  and  this  recurs  again  and  again 

is  especially  marked  in  the  irony,  which  is  not  i  i-it  n-,  iiia:  iliat  ut 

Demosthenes,    but  heavy  and  rough;  cf,  ^16  (<iiya  -naynci),  40. 

41.  43  (fT<Kpa>TaT<»\  49  (/z«i/f>v  dixaiov').      The  vocaiai"  ir\      I  nn*  <    i\e 

is,  as  Blass  remarks,  lavish  and  coarse;  liiere  «:t  .1-  i    tin  iiti   i~ 

ances  of  this  sort  as  in  the  earliest  of  the  -( im  ? u 

and  the  abusive  etfect  is  heightened  by  a  n   r  t  r 

epithet  with  another  which  passes  beyond  the  1 

thenic  force  into  sheer  violence.     Compare,  in  ad<i  t    i    t     ilu 

instances  cited  by  Blass,  §12  (Ttovrjporaroi  xat  aSixwraroLj^  32  {^/jO^aU' 
ptav  xat  (J>Budo?j)y{a'/^,  39  (xaxoopyot  aoififfra:  xat  7:ov7]po\  avi^pioTZoi^, 
The  failure  in  good  taste  and  artistic  reserve  is  i:  :u  'v  1  rought 
out  by  a  comparison  of  this  speech  with  37  or  45.  ili',  *  pi>  iient 
of  Pantaenetus  is  also  hotly  indignant  at  liie  inipuiUiutj  01  his 
adversary  ;  as  for  Apollodorus,  his  anger  inflamed  by  personal 
hatred  as  well  as  by  pecuniary  losses,  repels  us  by  its  implacable 
bitterness;  but  in  each  case  the  expression  which  i) mo  liunes 
lends  to  indignation  gives  it  power  and  weight,  anct  ti 
of  a  fine  and  keen  irony  with  an  assumption  ui  .u:t 
the  character  of  his  client  and  humbles  the  ndversar> 
oemium  and  epilogue  too  have  the  usual  dignity  ol 
speech  rising  gradually  into  a  storm  of  passion  which  at  the  close 
subsides  into  appeal.  In  Or.  35  there  is  neither  superiority  of 
attitude  nor  refinement  of  tone,  and  the  virulence  of  the  pruue- 
mium  is  reflected  in  the  epilogue  ;  compare  the  turgid  phrases  in 
§55  (^"^aC^fi' — ffo<pt!^oufftv^  7:o>7jpcu'^ — 7:a^>oupyou(Tt^  with  the  si  ;  i^ 
rouzou^  TTf^  ayav  xoXaxeia^  i7:t(T^rj(TeTe,  45.  88,  and  with  the  nobly 
expressed  plea  for  the  maintenance  of  justice  in  37.  60. 

Or.  40. — The  second  speech  against  Boeotus  cai  n    ■    ;  .    itriy 
be  compared  with  the  first;  the  latter,  turnine  <n)   i  ion: 
ment,  owes  partly  to  this  fact  its  surpassing  li\  t  ;  !<--    iki 
changefulness;  the   former,  dealing  with   a    11  ite  :      '    : 
would  naturally  be  more  quiet  and  sober  in  coloring  ai 


■ .  e  I :  ( 


u;  ib 


h 


<  Ji 


'  t  -  >~  < 


li  vi 


.t.'iiC. 


•  40 

Considering,  indeed,  the  relations  of  the  parties  to  the  suit,  we 
mi^ht  look  for  some  such  mixture  of  strong  feeling  with  close 
ar!  1  ent  as  is  exhibited  in  ^36  and  45;  but  the  two  brothers 
h,,i  rn  ip:^  hardly  been  intimate  enough  to  feel  that  cordial 
harr!  uhich  d  t  nc^uishes  the  quarrel  between  Phormio  and 
Apoiioii  rii  Ihe  speech  displays,  in  fact,  nehher  strength  of 
I  >t^s  1  nor  marked  force  of  reasoning  ;  its  lax  structure  is  reflected 
i!i  lie  comparative  weakness  of  deictic  expressions,  the  propor- 
tion of  which  (2.28)  is  about  the  same  as  in  Or.  39.  The  lack  of 
the  apostrophe  it  has  in  common  with  Orr.  27  and  30;  but  how 
far  it  is  from  possessing  the  compact  energy  of  these  speeches 
appears  by  the  almost  complete  absence  of  asyndeton,  of  which 
only  tw  I  iceble  examples  occur  (§21.  47).  The  want  of  that 
dramatic  I  -  hich  this  figure  often  gives  is  further  emphasized 

oy  in      a.  L  UKii  uc  liiid  neither  the  challenge,  the  suggestion,  nor 
the  r-      nrnl  nn-wer;  in  short,  none  of  those  abrupt  and  telling 
checks  to  the  t     \  of  speech  by  which  Demosthenes  at  once  fixes 
an  i    ;    p  ises  the  attention.     The  rhetorical  value  of  asyndeton 
co-r;  1  iiiidly  be  better  illustrated  thali  from  this  drowsy  stream  of 
c   I- iiu  polysyndeton;  the  reluctance  to  pause,  which  the  per- 
-onnectives  indicate,  gives  the  impression  that  the  orator 
i    n  :    ^  ;;ceping  the  interest  of  his  audience,  and  thus  dulls 
■   >t        i  fatigues  the  mind  of  the  reader.     This  anxiety 
nn  N       oression  in  the  words  did  to  6X(yov  thai  110 1  to  odwp 
:\    A        p  average  length  of  the    Demosthenean    private 
i<^  ti  in    n  iiid  a  half  pages— or,  if  we  omit  the  twodeuter- 
:   '  1  half;  this  one,  with  its  sixteen  and  a  half, 
seems  quite  long  enough  for  an  effective  development  of  the  case  ; 
compare,   n    ne  end  of  Orr.  36  and  38,  the  proud  iHpa  to  vdiop. 
It  is  true  that  Or.  41  ends  with  the  words  r^oOc  oUyov  u3wp  a>ay- 
xaCo,a£voc  ^^r-^'' ;  but  it  is  really  very  short  (8^  pp.),  and  that  final 
phrase  at  the  close  of  a  successfully  completed  demonstration  is 
merely  a  dignified  note  of  complaint,  while  this,  occurring  in  the 
in    ;  :        I  tin   speech,  produces  an  inartistic  jar  by  revealing  the 
a^a^L>  n  I    a     e>i  i  tin       maker's  mind.     I  cannot  therefore  agree 
with  tht    renuiiK  of  Bla^^  JII  454):  "  Ueberhaupt  ist  der  Aus- 
drnck  .  .  .  rednerUrb  knlftig";  it  has  persuasiveness  to  a  degree, 
f,  n  no  fit       Th  t:  the  writer  was  a  student  of  Dph  nsthenes  is 
-,a^^  .      i  n        V    li    borrowings  firom  the  first  speech  against 

i;  also  by  the  openin^     ords  of  the  prooemium,  which 


.-,? 


n 


h 


snnc^' 


'< 


41 

recall  those  of  Or.  55,  but  lack  their  neatness  and  charm  ;  here 
the  general  reflection  is  laid  down  in  the  usual  serious  way,  there 
the  apa  turns  it  into  a  discovery  made  by  the  speaker,  and  so 
gives  us  at  once  the  vision  of  his  wide-eyed  innocence.  1  in 
touches  of  insinuation  in  §8  (iTr/ryfrt'aCev  x.  r.  f .),  23  Qn—xofu<Tdfie>o>), 
and  the  air  of  moral  superiority  in  §12  (t^w  d'—i-eiff^^^aozw)^ 
48-9  (^xdyu)  fikv — dya^mxrev^)  are  sufficiently  in  the  tone  of  the  preced- 
ing speech  to  show  that  this  writer  wished  to  prebcive  lu  .M  n- 
titheus  the  attitude  in  which  Demosthenes  had  placed  h'm  :  ni 
he  lacked  the  ironic  power  by  which  the  latter  made  this  reserve 
appear  the  restraint  imposed  by  a  sense  of  right  and  decorum  on 
a  proud  and  energetic  temperament.  There  is  a  slight  touch  of 
irony  in  §28  (wfTTzep  xXrjZT^pe^)  and  an  easy  sneer  in  §32  (viy  jr  x. 
T.  ^.)  ;  but  these  do  not  smack  strongly  ol  1  it  nn^tlienes.  Denun- 
ciation is  direct  enough  in  §20.34.  43-  5-  dn  njli  the  v*  a-  n  ;n\ 
is  not  altogether  Demosthenean :   we  have  xaxovpyoq,  xaxuupywv 

{xaxnupyi^ffat  Dem.  45.  30),  roV./aa,  zoAnr^poc^  iTrt/SooXo^  ;   the  nominal 

form  in  these  last  gives  an  aggressive  force  hardly  to  be  felt  in 
the  common  use  of  the  corresponding  verbs.  Repetition  is  fcii  ni 
in  two  examples  of  anaphora  (§42.  59)  and  one  of  the  rare  epana- 
diplosis  (§53)  ;  but  this  last  is  an  isolated  instance  of  nnusually 
vigorous  expression,  and  the  representation  of  this  one  figure  does 
not  make  up  for  the  absences  and  weaknesses  which  nave  been 
noted. 

Or.  46. — The  second  speech  against  Stephanus  must  be  set 
against  the  other  deuterologies,  28  and  31 ;  if  it  were  by  P  nios- 
thenes,  we  should  expect  to  find  it  holding  the  same  relation  to 
Or.  45  that  these  do  to  their  respective  Aoyoi.  Now  Or.  27  is,  as 
has  been  said  above,  mainly  concerned  with  exposition  and  argu- 
ment, as  is  also  Or.  30,  one  of  the  quietest  in  tone  among  the 
fourteen ;  and  it  is  noteworthy  that  these  two  alone  contain  no 
example  of  apostrophe,  which  means  that  they  are  directed  to  the 
court,  not  at  the  adversary.  But  the  very  purpose  of  the  second 
appearance  is  aggressive ;  in  coming  forward  to  refute  his  oppo- 
nent the  speaker  enters  inevitably  upon  attack  :  and  the  tone  of  the 
Demosthenean  deuterologies  is  in  accordance  wnn  ihib  nc  cess'tv 


a>"^/ 


of  the  situation.    Apostrophe,  irony,  energetic 

the  prevailing  tone  is  exclamatory,  eager,  indignant ;  the 

ments  are  brief  and   pointed,  clinched   by  passional 

On  the  other  hand  the  two  speeches  against  Stephanus  ^nuw  ai 


n^on  aDi 


,  .t: 


:n-!.p,l- 
ance. 


i,)".  I' 


42 


43 


entirely  different  relation  to  each  other.  The  first  is  rich  in  all  the 
figures  and  devices  which  can  enliven  argument  and  convey  feel- 
ing, while  the  second  is  merely  an  array  of  arguments ;  and  this 
inversion  shows  a  weakness  alike  in  logic  and  in  art  wholly  incom- 
patible with  any  theory  of  Demosthenean  authorship  for  46.  The 
other  tests  point  to  the  same  conclusion.  The  challenging  ques- 
tion, indeed,  and  the  apostrophe  are  found  in  combination  (§25. 
28),  and  there  is  an  effective  bit  of  irony  (§19).  But  the  sugges- 
tion and  the  rhetorical  answer  are  wanting,  as  are  too  all  forms  of 
repetition  ;  the  vituperative  word  -avovpyoq  is  frank  enough,  but 
out  of  place  at  the  very  beginning;  and  the  extremely  infrequent 
use  of  asyndeton  (§5.  14.  20)  tells  heavily  against  the  speech.  The 
proportion  of  deictic  expressions  (4.  8)  is  much  higher  than  in 
any  genuine  oration  ;  which  seems  at  least  to  show  that  the  wnier 
recognized  their  value,  perhaps  too  that  he  exaggerated  their  use 
beyond  need. 

Or.  56. — A.  Schafer  has  shown  that  the  speech  agaiqst  Dionys- 
odorus  must  have  been  delivered  after  the  death  of  Demosthenes. 
It  perhaps  comes  nearer  to  the  Demosthenic  type  than  any  of  the 
orations  hitherto  examined,  containing  as  it  does  nearly  all  of  the 
characteristic  features  on  which  I  have  laid  stress.  Denunciation 
is  very  slight,  being  in  fact  confined  to  the  one  word  di^aifr^u^roq 
(§41);  but  this  is  uttered  with  much  sharpness  of  emphasis.  Ana- 
phora occurs  once  (§10),  epanadiplosis  once  (§38).  Interrogation 
is  abundant,  with  three  instar.ces  of  the  suggestion  (§2.  27.  38)  and 
three  of  the  challenge  (§39  dzs,  40) ;  and  there  is  an  example  of 
the  rhetorical  answer,  §28.  Asyndeton  is  quite  frequent,  and 
apostrophe  is  freely  and  effectively  used  ;  compare  the  rapid  turn- 
ing from  the  adversary  to  the  judge  and  again  to  the  adversary  in 
§25,  the  argument  rising  into  emphatic  assertion,  §26-8,  and  into 
denunciation,  §40-2,  the  tone  of  challenge  imparted  to  the  argu- 
ment in  §32  and  §39,  and  the  vigorous  insistence  of  §38.  There 
are.  however,  other  phenomena  which,  if  the  genuineness  of  the 
speech  had  to  be  decided  on  stylistic  grounds,  would  tend  to  cast 
doubt  upon  it.  The  proportion  of  deictic  expressions  (2.0)  is  no 
higher  than  in  Or.  55,  and  the  preponderance  of  fjth  oov  over 
roj'^ov  (6 :  2)  is  not  Demosthenic.  The  lengthy  prooemium  con- 
tains much  general  reflection  in  §1-2  and  a  long  anticipation  of  the 
narrative  in  §3-4  ;  in  this,  as  in  the  whole  speech,  we  miss  the 
compact  structure  and  pointed  conciseness  of  the  genuine  orations. 


0 


Despite  the  employment  of  vivid  figures,  there  is  rarely  ;  rv  \  ivid 
sharpness  and  curtness  ;  the  livelier  forms  of  question  lur  (lulled 
by  length  of  phrase  ;  and  the  asyndeton  11  .45,  which  micrht  fairly 
be  called  cumulative,  lacks,  by  reason  of  the  same  lenuUi  ?  s  all 
the  rapidity  and  weight  that  should  belong  to  this  figure.  On  uie 
whole,  asyndeton  is  employed  (§7.  21.  22.  23.  27.  36.  37.  40.  46) 
rather  for  deliberate  emphasis  than  in  any  warm  or  quick  tone, 
though  there  is  force  in  the  rhetorical  answer  and  in  y'izdaaai^z^ 

§40.     Irony  is  found  in  §40  (a>  ^ikriffre)  and  §41  {i>orwq  d^dpeloq),  in 

the  latter  case  passing  immediately  into  denunciation ;  but  these 
are  slight  instances,  and  the  scornful  familiarity  of  the  vocative 
has  less  propriety  here  than  in  36.  52,  where  it  is  justified  by  the 
intimacy  of  the  two  enemies  and  by  the  tone  of  lofty  rebuke  which 
pervades  that  passage.  In  short,  the  excellences  of  Or.  56  are  not 
superlative  ;  the  writer  is  master  of  his  art  so  far  as  it  was  to  be 
learned,  while  lacking  the  power  and  subtletyof  expression  which 
only  high  artistic  endowment  could  give. 


f 


■^ 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 


'S| 


88:de 

K.-rk 


101( 


K63 


T      7 


1^' 


•.  'S  . 


^ 


v>^ 


S--       m 


tV- 


♦.';;». 

;^'-^. 


■'^:. 


'M\ 


k   -x 


"^*M 


^' 


7  "  f 


*e» 


.H 


1| 


S^ 


•v 


-.4  «'*'«*  »'. 


:;j,    ■:■» 


